mmmm 

wll 


mwtm 


r  J.d  £ 


i&iv 


Mfiii 


Mil 


Sills 


irawlfimtea 


"  «„*  *■  "  -  •*  .  r  U  i.f7"  r  •  • 

^  H~5  v 
- 


:rj  it  t' 


■4te¥- HZ* 

i.i  -.Vr. t: ■'  S &  5  Sf  fc  6  -  a  ; 


BBSS 


pM$ 


*  \ 


«> 


>W 


at  £*mi 


m  ♦ 


u>- 


PRINOETON.  N.  J. 


\ 


J 


Part  of  tlio 

ADD  JEON  ALEXANDER  LIBRARY, 

which  was  presented  by  l 

Messrs.  R.  L.  and  A.  Shart.  \ 


♦ 


o*. - ->•-.**•-  ,  _»  -»4 

-A.  -.,^><  30^  ©< 

f) 

|  Case, 

°  She!/, 

Hook 


;  '  ->3^' 


Ci 


Division... . 
Section ... . 


0 

w  c  - 


m 


I 

a 

.9 

1 


'.J  v> 


LJ^#  •_- -JV' 
|g^-jir‘CTr  - 


15S\BG 

rvt  i  o 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2018  with  funding  from 
Princeton  Theological  Seminary  Library 


https://archive.org/details/translatorsreviv00mccl_0 


THE 


TRANSLATORS  REVIVED; 

A 

3Bingrnp{riral  JHnnnir 

OP  THE 


AUTHORS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION 

OF  THE 


HOLY  BIBLE. 


BY  A.  W.  McCLURE 


jSrm-^ork 


♦ 

♦ 


CHARLES  SCRIBNER, 


1853. 


Entered  according  to  Act  of  Congress  in  the  year  1853,  by 


CHARLES  SCRIBNER, 

in  the  Clerk’s  Office  of  the  District  Court  of  the  United  States  for  the 
Southern  District  of  New  York. 


TOBITT  S  COMBINATION-TYPE, 
181  William-street. 


PREFACE. 


This  little  volume  has  been  long  in  preparation.  It 
is  more  than  twenty  years  since  the  Author’s  attention 
was  directed  to  the  inquiry,  What  were  the  personal 
qualifications  for  their  work  possessed  by  King  James’s 
Translators  of  the  Bible  ?  He  expected  to  satisfy  him¬ 
self  without  difficulty,  but  found  himself  sorely  disap¬ 
pointed.  There  was  abundance  of  general  testimony 
to  their  learning  and  piety ;  but  nowhere  any  particu¬ 
lar  account  of  the  men  themselves.  Copious  histories 
of  the  origin,  character,  and  results  of  their  work  have 
been  drawn  up  with  elaborate  research ;  but  of  the 
Translators  personally,  little  more  was  told  than  a  mea¬ 
gre  catalogue  of  their  names,  with  brief  notices  of  such 
offices  as  a  few  of  them  held. 

The  only  resource  was  to  take  these  names  in  detail, 
and  search  for  any  information  relative  to  each  indi¬ 
vidual.  Tor  a  long  time,  but  little  came  to  hand  illus¬ 
trative  of  their  characters  and  acquirements,  except  in 
relation  to  some  of  the  more  prominent  men  included  in 
the  royal  commission.  The  Author  quite  despaired  of 
ever  being  able  to  identify  the  greater  part  of  them,  by 
any  thing  more  than  their  bare  surnames.  But  devot¬ 
ing  much  of  his  time  to  searching  in  public  libraries,  he 


IV. 


PREFACE. 


by  degrees  recovered  from  oblivion  one  by  one  of  these 
worthies,  till  only  two  of  them,  Fairclough  and  Sander¬ 
son,  remain  without  some  certain  testimonial  of  their 
fitness  for  the  most  responsible  undertaking  in  the  re¬ 
ligious  literature  of  the  English  world.  In  regard  to 
some  of  them,  who  for  a  long  time  eluded  his  search, 
the  revived  information  at  last  seemed  almost  like  a  res¬ 
urrection.  As  the  result  of  his  researches,  which  he 
has  carried,  as  he  believes,  to  the  utmost  extent  to  which 
it  can  be  done  with  the  means  accessible  on  this  side 
of  the  Atlantic,  he  offers  to  all  who  are  interested  to 
know  in  regard  to  the  general  sufficiencv  and  reliable- 
ness  of  the  Common  Version,  these  biographical  sketches 
of  its  authors.  He  feels  assured  that  they  will  afford 
historical  demonstration  of  a  fact  which  much  astonished 
him  when  it  began  to  dawn  upon  his  convictions, — that 
the  first  half  of  the  seventeenth  century,  when  the 
Translation  was  completed,  was  the  Golden  Age  of 
biblical  and  oriental  learning  in  England.  Never  be¬ 
fore,  nor  since,  have  these  studies  been  pursued  by 
scholars  whose  vernacular  tongue  is  the  English,  with 
such  zeal,  and  industry,  and  success.  This  remarkable 
fact  is  such  a  token  of  God’s  providential  care  of  his 
word,  as  deserves  most  devout  acknowledgment. 

That  the  true  character  of  their  employment,  at  the 
precise  stage  where  those  good  men  took  it  up,  may  be 
properly  understood  by  such  as  have  not  given  particu¬ 
lar  attention  to  the  subject,  a  condensed  “Introductory 
Narrative”  is  given.  In  its  outlines,  this  follows  the 
crowded  octavos  of  the  late  Christopher  Anderson.  He 
has  gleaned  out  the  very  corners  of  the  field  so  care¬ 
fully,  as  to  leave  little  for  any  who  may  follow  him.  To 
his  work,  or  rather  to  the  skilful  abridgment  of  it,  in  a 


PREFACE. 


V. 


single  octavo  volume,  by  Rev.  Dr.  Prime,  all  who  desire 
more  minute  information  on  that  part  of  the  subject  are 
respectfully  referred. 

The  writers  to  whom  the  author  of  this  book  is  most 
indebted  for  his  biographical  materials  are  Thomas 
Puller  and  Anthony  a- Wood.  The  former,  the  wittiest 
and  one  of  the  most  delightful  of  the  old  English  writ- 
ers, — and  the  latter  one  of  the  most  crabbed  and  cyni¬ 
cal.  What  has  been  obtained  from  them  was  gathered 
wherever  it  was  sprinkled,  in  scattered  morsels,  over 
their  numerous  and  bulky  volumes.  Beside  what  vTas 
furnished  from  these  sources,  numerous  fragments  have 
been  collected  from  a  wide  range  of  reading,  including 
every  thing  that  seemed  to  promise  any  additional  matter 
of  information. 

The  wTork  is,  doubtless,  quite  imperfect,  because  after 
the  lapse  of  more  than  two  centuries,  during  wffiich  no 
person  appears  to  have  thought  of  the  thing,  the  means 
of  information  have  been  growing  more  scanty,  and  the 
difficulty  of  recovering  it  has  been  constantly  increased. 
Critical  inquisitors  may  be  able  to  detect  some  inaccu¬ 
racies  in  pages  prepared  under  such  disadvantages  ;  but 
it  will  require  no  great  stretch  of  generosity  to  make 
due  allowance  for  them. 

The  general  result,  to  wffiich  the  Author  particularly 
solicits  the  attention  of  any  wffio  may  honor,  these  pages 
with  their  perusal,  is  the  ample  proof  afforded  of  the 
surpassing  qualifications  of  those  venerable  Translators, 
taken  as  a  body,  for  their  high  and  holy  work.  We 
have  here  presumptive  evidence  of  the  strongest  kind, 
that  their  work  is  deserving  of  entire  confidence.  It 
ought  to  be  received  as  a  “  final  settlement”  of  the 
translation  of  the  Scriptures  for  popular  use, — at  least, 


VI. 


PREFACE. 


till  the  time  when  a  body  of  men  equally  qualified  can 
be  brought  together  to  re-adjust  the  work, — a  time  which 
most  certainly  has  not  yet  arrived  !  If  that  time  shall 
ever  come,  may  there  be  found  among  their  successors 
the  vast  learning,  wisdom,  and  piety  of  the  old  Trans¬ 
lators  happily  revived! 


CONTENTS 


Introductory  Narrative  . 

Venerable  Bede  .... 

John  Wiclif . 

Knyghton . 

John  de  Trevisa  .... 
William  Tyndale  .... 

J  ohn  Rogers . 

Miles  Coverdale ..... 
Cranmer’s  Bibles  .... 

Edward  VI. . 

Marian  Persecutions  .... 

Geneva  Bible . 

William  Whittingham  .  .  . 

Anthony  Gilby . 

Thomas  Sampson,  D.D.  .  .  . 

Queen  Elizabeth . 

Parker’s  or  the  Bishops’  Bible  . 
Hampton  Court  Conference  .  ; 

King  James's  Version  Printed  . 

Made  in  Good  Time  . 

Competency  of  the  Translators  . 

Their  Mode  of  Procedure  and  Rides  . 


page 

11 

12 

13 

15 

17 

19 

33 

34 
39 

43 

44 
47 
43 

51 

52 

54 

55 
57 
59 
61 
62 
67 


Vlll 


CONTENTS. 


Launcelot  Andrews,  D.D. 

• 

• 

• 

78 

John  Overall,  D  D. 

• 

• 

• 

•  88 

Hadrian  Saravia,  D.D. 

• 

• 

• 

93 

Richard  Clarke,  D.D.  . 

• 

• 

• 

.  97 

John  Laifield,  D.D.  . 

• 

• 

• 

97 

Robert  Tighe,  D.D. 

* 

• 

• 

.  98 

Francis  Burleigh,  D.D.  . 

• 

• 

• 

98 

Geoffry  King 

• 

• 

• 

.  99 

Richard  Thompson  . 

• 

• 

• 

99 

William  Bedwell 

• 

• 

• 

.  100 

Edward  Lively 

• 

• 

• 

103 

John  Richardson,  D.D. 

• 

• 

• 

.  104 

Lawrence  Chaderton,  D.D. 

• 

• 

• 

107 

Francis  Dillingham 

• 

• 

• 

.  116 

Roger  Andrews,  D.D. 

• 

• 

• 

117 

Thomas  Harrison 

• 

• 

• 

.  118 

Robert  Spaulding,  D.D.  . 

• 

• 

• 

119 

Andrew  Bing,  D.D. 

• 

• 

• 

119 

John  Hab.ding,  D.D.  .  •  . 

• 

• 

• 

.  120 

John  Reynolds,  D  D. 

• 

• 

• 

121 

Thomas  Holland,  D.D. 

• 

• 

• 

.  134 

Richard  Kilby,  D  D. 

• 

• 

• 

138 

Miles  Smith,  D.D. 

• 

• 

• 

.  141 

Richard  Brett,  D.D. 

• 

• 

• 

144 

[Daniel]  Fairclough,  D.D.  • 

• 

• 

• 

•  •  1 45 

Thomas  Ravis,  D.D. 

• 

• 

• 

.  149 

George  Abbot.  D.D. 

• 

• 

• 

.  152 

Richard  Eedes,  D.D. 

• 

• 

• 

162 

Giles  Tomson,  D.D. 

• 

• 

• 

.  163 

Sir  Henry  Savile,  Knt,  . 

• 

• 

• 

.  164 

John  Peryn,  D.D.  . 

• 

• 

• 

.  169 

CONTENTS. 

IX. 

Ralph  Ravens,  D.D,  . 

f 

• 

• 

170 

John  Harmar,  D.D. 

• 

• 

.  170 

William  Barlow,  D  D. 

• 

• 

• 

172 

John  Spencer,  D  D-  . 

• 

• 

177 

Roger  Fenton,  D  D. 

• 

• 

• 

180 

Ralph  Hutchinson,  D.D. 

• 

• 

• 

183 

William  Dakins . 

• 

• 

183 

Michael  Rabbet 

• 

• 

- 

184 

Mr.  Sanderson  ..... 

• 

• 

.  185 

John  Duport,  D  D.  • 

• 

• 

• 

186 

William  Brainthwaite,  D.D. 

• 

§ 

.  189 

Jeremiah  Radcliffe,  D.D. 

• 

• 

• 

189 

Samuel  Ward,  D-D . 

• 

• 

.  190 

Andrew  Downes,  D.D.  .  ,  s 

• 

• 

• 

198 

John  Bois  .  .... 

• 

• 

.  199 

John  Ward,  D.D.  .... 

• 

• 

• 

208 

John  Aglionby,  D.D . 

• 

• 

209 

Leonard  Hutten,  D.D. 

9 

• 

• 

210 

Supervisors  of  the  Work 

• 

• 

.  212 

Thomas  Bilson,  D-D.  .  ... 

• 

• 

• 

214 

Richard  Bancroft,  DD. 

• 

• 

.  216 

Conclusion  ..... 

• 

• 

• 

222 

Revised  Editions  ..... 

• 

• 

.  223 

Importance  of  Circulating  the  Scriptures 

• 

• 

• 

225 

Practice  of  the  Early  Christians  . 

• 

• 

.  227 

No  better  Translators  now  to  be  found 

• 

• 

• 

232 

Opinions  of  Critics  .... 

• 

• 

.  236 

Multiplication  of  the  Common  Version 

• 

• 

• 

241 

Its  Influence  on  Religious  Literature  . 

• 

• 

.  242 

An  Obstacle  to  Sectarism  .  .  . 

• 

• 

• 

243 

Has  Survived  Great  Changes 

• 

• 

.  244 

Translators  Blessed  of  God 

• 

• 

• 

247 

INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


The  translation  of  the  Bible  into  any  language 
is  an  event  of  the  highest  importance  to  those 
by  whom  that  language  is  spoken.  But  when 
such  a  translation  is  to  be  read  for  successive 
centuries,  by  uncounted  millions  scattered  over 
all  the  earth,  and  for  whose  use  so  many  millions 
of  copies  have  already  been  printed,  it  becomes 
a  wrnrk  of  the  highest  moral  and  historical  inter¬ 
est.  Thus  the  translation  and  printing  of  the 
Bible  in  English  forms  a  most  important  event 
in  modern  history.  Far  beyond  any  other  trans¬ 
lation,  it  has  been,  and  is,  and  will  be,  to  multi¬ 
tudes  which  none  can  number,  the  living  oracle 
of  God,  giving  to  them,  in  their  mother  tongue, 
their  surest  and  safest  teaching  on  all  that  can 
affect  their  eternal  welfare. 

Many  attempts  had  been  made,  at  various 


12 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


times,  to  put  different  portions  of  the  Scriptures 
into  the  common  speech  of  the  English  people. 
Of  these,  one  of  the  most  noticeable  was  a  trans¬ 
lation  of  John’s  Gospel  into  Anglo-Saxon,  made, 
at  the  very  close  of  his  life,  by  the  “  Venerable 
Bede,”  a  Northumbrian  monk,  who  died  in  his 
cell,  in  May,  A.  D.  735.  A  most  interesting  ac¬ 
count  of  his  last  illness  is  given  by  Cuthbert,  his 
scholar  and  biographer.  Toward  evening  of  the 
day  of  his  death,  one  of  his  disciples  said,  “  Be¬ 
loved  teacher,  one  sentence  remains  to  be  writ¬ 
ten.”  “  Write  it  quickly,  then,”  said  the  dying 
saint  ;  and  summoning  all  his  strength  for  this 
last  flash  of  the  expiring  lamp,  he  dictated  the 
holy  words.  When  told  that  the  work  was 
finished,  he  answered,  “  Thou  sayest  well.  It  is 
finished  !”  He  then  requested  to  be  taken  up,  and 
placed  in  that  part  of  his  cell  where  he  was  wont 
to  kneel  at  his  private  devotions  ;  so  that,  as  he 
said,  he  might  while  sitting  there  call  upon  his 
Father.  He  then  sang  the  doxology, — “  Glory  be 
to  the  Father,  and  to  the  Son,  and  to  the  Holy 
Ghost  !”  and  as  he  sang  the  last  syllable,  he 
drew  his  last  breath.* 


*  See  Neander,  Denkwiirdigkeiten,  &c.,  III.  171 — 175;  and 
Fuller,  Church  History,  I.  149 — 151. 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


13 


The  admirable  King  Alfred,  who  ascended  the 
throne  two  hundred  years  after  the  birth  of  Bede, 
translated  the  Psalms  into  Anglo-Saxon.  But 
the  first  complete  translation  which  can  be  said 
to  have  been  published ,  so  as  to  come  into  exten¬ 
sive  use,  was  that  made  by  Wiclif,  about  the  year 
1380.  It  was  not  made  from  the  “original  He¬ 
brew  and  Greek  of  the  Holy  Ghost but  from  the 
Vulgate,  a  Latin  version,  chiefly  prepared  by  Je¬ 
rome  during  the  latter  part  of  the  fourth  century. 
John  Wiclif  was  born  in  Yorkshire,  England,  in 
the  year  1324.  He  was  a  priest,  and  a  professor 
of  divinity  in  the  University  of  Oxford.  His  ar¬ 
dent  piety  was  nursed  by  the  Scriptures  which 
gave  it  birth.  He  is  commonly  called  “  the 
morning-star  of  the  Protestant  reformation,”  and 
was  one  of  the  brightest  of  those  scattered  lights 
of  the  Dark  Ages,  who  are  often  spoken  of  as 
“  reformers  before  the  reformation.”  Like  Mar¬ 
tin  Luther,  his  opposition  to  popish  errors  and 
corruptions  was  at  first  confined  to  a  few  points  ; 
but  prayer,  study  of  the  Bible,  and  growing  grace, 
led  him  on  in  a  constant  advance  toward  the  pu¬ 
rity  of  truth.  He  became  in  doctrine  what  would 
now  be  called  a  Calvinist  ;  and  in  church  disci¬ 
pline  his  views  agreed  with  those  which  are  now 
maintained  by  Congregationalists.  After  encoun- 


14 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


tering  many  prosecutions  and  persecutions,  having 
however  a  powerful  protector  in  John  of  Gaunt, 
(or  Ghent ,  in  Flanders,  his  native  place,)  the  fa¬ 
mous  old  Duke  of  Lancaster,  Wiclif  peacefully 
closed  his  devout  and  laborious  life,  at  his  rec¬ 
tory  of  Lutterworth,  in  1384.  Forty-one  years 
after,  by  order  of  the  popish  Council  of  Con¬ 
stance,  his  bones  were  unearthed,  burned  to  ashes, 
and  cast  into  the  Swift,  a  neighboring  brook. 
“Thus,”  says  Thomas  Fuller,  “this  brook  has 
conveyed  his  ashes  into  Avon,  Avon  into  Severn, 
Severn  into  the  narrow  seas,  they  into  the  main 
ocean.  And  thus  the  ashes  of  Wiclif  are  the  em¬ 
blem  of  his  doctrine,  which  is  now  dispersed  ail 
the  world  over.”* 

Wiclif’s  translation  of  the  Bible  was  made  be¬ 
fore  the  invention  of  the  printing  machines  ;  and 


*  This  noble  passage  from  a  favorite  author,  Wordsworth  has 
finely  versified  in  one  of  his  Ecclesiastical  Sonnets : 

“  As  thou  these  ashes,  little  brook,  wilt  bear 
Into  the  Avon,  Avon  to  the  tide 
Of  Severn,  Severn  to  the  narrow  seas, 

Into  main  Ocean  they,  this  deed  accurst 
An  emblem  yields  to  friends  and  enemies, 

How  the  bold  Teacher’s  doctrine,  sanctified 
By  Truth,  shall  spread  throughout  the  world  dispersed.” 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


15 


the  manuscripts,  though  quite  numerous,  were 
very  costly.  Nicholas  Belward  suffered  from 
popish  cruelty  in  1429,  for  having  in  his  posses¬ 
sion  a  copy  of  Wiclif’s  New  Testament.  That 
copy  cost  him  four  marks  and  forty  pence.  This 
sum,  so  much  greater  was  the  value  of  money 
then  than  it  is  now,  was  considered  as  a  sufficient 
annual  salary  for  a  curate.  The  same  value  at 
the  present  time  would  pay  for  many  hundreds  of 
copies  of  the  Testament,  well  printed  and  bound. 
Such  are  the  marvels  wrought  by  the  art  of 
printing,  which  Luther  was  wont  to  call  “  the 
last  and  best  gift”  of  Providence.*  It  has  be¬ 
come  “  the  capacious  reservoir  of  human  know¬ 
ledge,  whose  branching  streams  diffuse  sciences, 
arts,  and  morality,  through  all  ages  and  all  na¬ 
tions.”!  Let  us  hope,  with  an  old  writer,  “that 
the  low  pricing  of  the  Bible  may  never  occasion 
the  low  'prizing  of  the  Bible.” 

Limited  as  the  circulation  of  the  English  Bible 
must  have  been  in  its  manuscript  form,  it  still 
made  no  little  trouble  for  the  monkish  doctors  of 
that  day.  One  of  them,  Henry  de  Knyghton, 
said,  “  This  Master  John  Wiclif  hath  translated 


*  Summum  et  postremum  donum, 
f  Darwin’s  Zoonomia,  I.  51. 


16 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


the  gospel  out  of  Latin  into  English,  which  Christ 
had  intrusted  with  the  clergy  and  doctors  of  the 
Church,  that  they  might  minister  it  to  the  laity 
and  weaker  sort,  according  to  the  state  of  the 
times  and  the  wants  of  men.  So  that,  by  this 
means,  the  gospel  is  made  vulgar,  and  made  more 
open  to  the  laity,  and  even  to  women  who  can 
read,  than  it  used  to  be  to  the  most  learned  of  the 
clergy  and  those  of  the  best  understanding  !  And 
what  was  before  the  chief  gift  of  the  clergy  and 
doctors  of  the  Church,  is  made  for  ever  common 
to  the  laity.”  If  the  publication  of  an  English 
Bible  in  manuscript  caused  such  popish  lamenta¬ 
tions,  we  need  not  wonder  that  the  multiplication 
of  a  similar  work  in  print  should  afterwards  awa¬ 
ken  such  a  fury,  that  Rowland  Phillips,  the  pa¬ 
pistical  Vicar  of  Croydon,  in  a  noted  sermon 
preached  at  St.  Paul’s  Cross,  London,  in  the  year 
1535,  declared  ;  “  We  must  root  out  printing,  or 
printing  will  root  out  us  !” 

Manuscripts  of  Wiclif ’s  complete  version  are 
still  numerous.  His  Bibles  are  nearly  as  numer¬ 
ous  as  his  New  Testaments  ;  and  there  are  be¬ 
sides  many  copies  of  separate  books  of  the  Scrip¬ 
tures.  They  are  quite  remarkable  for  their  legi¬ 
bility  and  beauty,  and  indicate  the  great  care  ta¬ 
ken  in  making  them,  and  in  preserving  them  for 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


17 


nearly  five  hundred  years.  The  New  Testament 
of  this  version  was  printed  in  the  year  1731,  or 
three  hundred  and  fifty  years  after  it  was  finished. 
The  whole  Bible  by  Wiclif  was  never  printed  till 
two  or  three  years  since,  when  it  appeared  at 
Oxford,  with  the  Latin  Vulgate,  from  which  it 
was  translated,  in  parallel  columns. 

Contemporary  with  Wiclif,  was  John  de  Tre- 
visa,  born  of  an  ancient  family,  at  Crocadon  in 
Cornwall.  He  was  a  secular  priest,  and  Vicar 
of  Berkeley.  He  translated  several  large  works 
out  of  Latin  into  English  ;  and  chiefly  the  entire 
Bible,  justifying  himself  by  the  example  of  the 
Venerable  Bede,  who  had  done  the  same  thing 
for  the  Gospel  of  John.  This  great,  and  good, 
and  dangerous  task  he  performed  by  commission 
from  his  noble  and  powerful  patron  and  protector, 
Lord  Thomas  de  Berkeley.  This  nobleman  had 
the  whole  of  the  book  of  Revelation,  in  I^atin 
and  French,  which  latter  was  then  generally  un¬ 
derstood  by  the  better  educated  class  of  English¬ 
men,  written  upon  the  walls  and  ceiling  of  his 
chapel  at  Berkeley,  where  it  was  to  be  seen  hun¬ 
dreds  of  years  after.  Trevisa,  notwithstanding 
his  translation  of  the  Bible  made  him  obnoxious 
to  the  persecutors  of  his  day,  lived  and  died  un¬ 
molested,  though  known  to  be  an  enemy  of  monks 


18 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


and  begging  friars.  He  expired,  full  of  honor 
and  years,  being  little  less  than  ninety  years  of 
age,  in  the  year  1397.*  Little  else  is  known  of 
him,  or  of  his  translation,  which  did  not  super¬ 
sede  the  labors  of  Wiclif. 

The  first  hook  ever  printed  with  metal  types  was 
the  Latin  Bible,  issued  by  Gutenberg  and  Fust, 
at  Mentz,  in  the  Duchy  of  Hesse,  between  the 
years  1450  and  1455,  for  it  bears  no  date.  It  is 
a  folio  of  641  leaves,  or  1282  pages,  in  two  vol¬ 
umes.  Though  a  first  attempt,  it  is  beautifully 
printed  on  very  fine  paper,  and  with  superior  ink. 
At  least  eighteen  copies  of  this  famous  edition 
are  known  to  be  in  existence  ;  four  of  them  on 
vellum,  and  fourteen  on  paper.  Twenty-five 
years  ago,  one  of  the  vellum  copies  was  sold  for 
five  hundred  and  four  pounds  sterling  ;  and  one 
of  the  paper  copies  lately  brought  one  hundred 
and  ninety  pounds.  Truly  venerable  relics  ! 
Thus  the  printing-press  paid  its  first  homage  to 
the  Best  of  Books  ;  the  highest  honor  ever  done 
to  that  illustrious  art,  and  the  highest  purpose  to 
which  it  could  ever  be  applied. 

The  first  Scripture  ever  printed  in  English  was 
a  sort  of  paraphrase  of  the  seven  penitential 


*  Fuller’s  Church  History  of  Britain,  I.  467. 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


19 


Psalms,  so  called,  by  John  Fisher,  the  popish 
bishop  of  Rochester,  who  was  beheaded  by  Hen¬ 
ry  VIII.  in  the  year  1535.  This  little  book  w^as 
printed  in  1505. 

The  first  decided  steps,  however,  toward  giv¬ 
ing  to  the  English  nation  a  Bible  printed  in  their 
own  tongue,  were  the  translations  of  the  Gospels 
of  Matthew  and  Mark,  made  by  William  Tyn- 
dale,  and  by  him  printed  at  Hamburg,  in  the  year 
1524  ; — and  a  translation  of  the  whole  of  the 
New  Testament,  printed  by  him  partly  at  Co¬ 
logne,  and  partly  at  Worms,  in  1525.  After  six 
editions  of  the  Testament  had  been  issued,  he 
published  Genesis  and  Deuteronomy,  in  1530  ; 
and  next  year  the  Pentateuch.  In  the  year  1535 
was  printed  the  entire  Bible,  under  the  auspices 
of  Miles  Coverdale,  who  mostly  followed  Tyn- 
dale  as  far  as  he  had  gone  ;  but  without  any  oth¬ 
er  connection  with  him.  Of  Coverdale,  further 
mention  will  be  made.  But  in  the  year  1537  ap¬ 
peared  a  folio  Bible,  printed  in  some  city  of  Ger¬ 
many,  with  the  following  title, — “  The  Byble, 
which  is  the  Holy  Scripture  ;  in  which  are  con- 
tayned  the  Olde  and  Newe  Testament,  truely  and 
purely  translated  into  Englysh — by  Thomas  Mat¬ 
thew. — MDXXXVII.”  This  is  substantially  the 
basis  of  all  the  other  versions  of  the  Bible  into 


20 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


English,  including  that  which  is  now  in  such  ex 
tensive  use.  It  contains  Tyndale’s  labors  as  far 
as  he  had  gone  previous  to  his  martyrdom  by  fire 
about  a  year  before  its  publication.  That  is  to 
say,  the  whole  of  the  New  Testament,  and  of  the 
Old,  as  far  as  the  end  of  the  Second  Book  of 
Chronicles,  or  exactly  two-thirds  of  the  entire 
Scriptures,  were  Tyndale’s  work.  The  other 
third,  comprising  the  remainder  of  the  Old  Tes¬ 
tament,  was  made  by  his  friend  and  co-laborer, 
Thomas  Matthew,  who  was  no  other  than  John 
Rogers,  the  famous  martyr,  afterwards  burnt  in 
the  days  of  “  bloody  Mary  and  wTho,  at  the 
time  of  his  immortal  publication,  went  by  the 
name  of  Matthew. 

William  Tyndale,  whose  vast  services  to  the 
‘  English-speaking  branches  of  the  Church  of  God 
have  never  been  duly  appreciated,  was  born  in 
the  Hundred  of  Berkeley,  and  probably  in  the  vil¬ 
lage  of  North  Nibley,  about  the  year  1484.  His 
family  wras  ancient  and  respectable.  His  grand- 
sire  was  Hugh,  Baron  de  Tyndale.  From  an  ear¬ 
ly  age,  he  was  brought  up  at  the  University  of 
Oxford.  Here,  during  a  lengthened  residence  in 
Magdalen  College,  he  became  a  proficient  in  all 
the  learning  of  that  day,  and  in  the  latter  part  of 
his  time  read  private  lectures  in  divinity.  He 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


21 


was  ordained  a  priest  in  1502  ;  and  became  a 
Minorite  Observantine  friar.  His  zeal  in  the  ex¬ 
position  of  the  Scriptures  excited  the  displeasure 
of  the  adversaries  ,  and  “  spying  his  time,”  says 
Foxe,  “he  removed  from  Oxford  to  the  Univer¬ 
sity  of  Cambridge,  where  he  likewise  made  his 
abode  a  certain  space.”  This  place  he  had  left 
by  1519.  In  total  independence  of  Luther,  he 
arose  at  the  same  time  with  that  great  translator 
of  the  Bible  into  German  ;  being  equally  moved 
with  him  to  resist  the  corruptions  and  oppres¬ 
sions  of  a  priesthood,  which  sought  to  imprison 
and  enslave  the  minds  of  all  nations,  by  keeping 
from  them  “the  key  of  knowledge.” 

Returning  from  Cambridge  to  his  native  coun¬ 
ty,  he  spent  nearly  two  years  in  the  manor-house 
of  Little  Sodbury,  as  tutor  to  the  children  of  Sir 
John  Walsh.  On  the  Sabbath  he  preached  in  the 
neighboring  parishes,  and  especially  at  St.  Aus¬ 
tin’s  Green,  in  Bristol.  At  Sir  John’s  hospitable 
board,  the  mitred  abbots,  and  other  ecclesiastics 
who  swTarmed  in  that  neighborhood,  were  frequent 
guests  ;  and  Tyndale  sharply  and  constantly  dis¬ 
puted  their  mean  superstitions.  At  the  first,  Sir 
John  and  his  lady  Anne  took  the  part  of  the  “  ab¬ 
bots,  deans,  archdeacons,  with  divers  other  doc¬ 
tors  and  great-beneficed  men  but  after  reading 


22 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


a  translation  of  Erasmus’s  “  Christian  Soldier’s 
Manual,”  which  Tyndale  made  for  them,  they 
took  his  part.  Upon  this,  those  “  doctorly  pre- 
latists”  forbore  Sir  John’s  good  cheer,  rather 
than  to  take  with  it  what  Fuller  calls  “the  sour 
sauce”  of  Tyndale’s  conversation.  A  storm  was 
now  gathering  over  his  head.  Not  only  the  ig¬ 
norant  hedge-priests  at  their  ale-houses,  but  the 
dignified  clergymen  in  the  Bishop’s  councils  be¬ 
gan  to  brand  him  with  the  name  of  heretic.  In 
1522  he  was  summoned,  with  all  the  other  priests 
of  the  district,  before  the  bishop’s  Chancellor.  In 
their  presence  he  was  very  roughly  handled.  In 
his  own  account,  he  says,  “When  I  came  before 
the  Chancellor,  he  threatened  me  grievously,  and 
reviled  me,  and  rated  me  as  though  I  had  been  a 
dog.” 

It  was  not  long  after  this,  that  in  disputing 
with  a  divine  reputed  to  be  quite  learned,  Tyn¬ 
dale  utterly  confounded  him  with  certain  texts  of 
Scripture  ;  upon  which  the  irritated  papist  ex¬ 
claimed, — “  It  were  better  for  us  to  be  without 
God’s  laws,  than  without  the  Pope’s  !”  This  was 
a  little  too  much  for  Tyndale,  who  boldly  replied, 
“  I  defy  the  Pope,  and  all  his  laws  ;  and  if  God 
spare  my  life,  ere  many  years,  I  will  cause  a  hoy 
that  driveth  the  plough  to  knoio  more  of  the  Scrip- 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


23 


ture  than  you  do  /”  A  noble  boast  ;  and  nobly 
redeemed  at  the  cost  of  his  life  !  He  now  clear¬ 
ly  saw,  that  nothing  could  rescue  the  mass  of  the 
English  nation  from  the  impostures  of  the  high 
priests  and  low  priests  of  Rome,  unless  the  Scrip¬ 
tures  were  placed  in  the  hands  of  all.  “  Which 
\ 

thing  only,”  he  says,  “  moved  me  to  tra?islate  the 
NewTestament.  Because  I  had  perceived  by  ex¬ 
perience,  how  that  it  was  impossible  to  establish 
the  lay  people  in  any  truth,  except  the  Scripture 
were  plainly  laid  before  their  eyes  in  the  mother 
tongue .” 

When  he  could  no  longer  remain  at  Sir  John 
Walsh’s  without  bringing  that  worthy  knight,  as 
well  as  himself,  into  danger,  Tyndale  went  to 
London,  with  letters  introducing  him,  as  a  ripe 
Greek  scholar,  to  the  patronage  of  that  Dr.  Tun- 
stall,  then  bishop  of  London,  who  afterwards 
burned  so  many  of  Tyndale’s  New  Testaments. 
The  courtly  and  classical  bishop  refused  to  be¬ 
friend  him  ;  and  he  who  had  hoped  in  that  pre¬ 
late’s  own  house  to  translate  the  New  Testa¬ 
ment,  was  obliged  to  seek  a  harbor  elsewhere. 
For  nearly  a  year,  he  resided  in  the  house  of 
Humphrey  Munmouth,  a  wealthy  citizen  of  Lon¬ 
don,  and  afterwards  an  alderman,  knight,  and 
sheriff.  During  this  time,  he  used  to  preach  in 


24 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


the  Church  of  St.  Dunstan’s  in  the  West.  By 
this  time,  he  was  convinced  that  no  where  in  all 
England  would  he  be  permitted  to  put  in  act  the 
glorious  resolve  he  had  formed  at  Little  Sod- 
bury. 

In  January,  1524,  with  a  heart  full  of  love 
and  pity  for  his  native  land,  Tyndale  sailed  for 
Hamburg,  being  “  helped  over  the  sea”  by  the 
generous  M unmouth,  who  also  assisted  him 
during  his  fifteen  months’  abode  in  that  city. 
Here  he  so  improved  his  time,  that  in  May,  1525, 
he  went  to  Cologne,  and  began  to  print  his  New 
Testament  in  quarto  form.  Ten  sheets  had 
hardly  been  worked  off,  before  an  alarm  was 
raised,  and  the  public  authorities  forbade  the 
work  to  go  on.  Tyndale  and  his  amanuensis, 
William  Roye,  managed  to  save  those  sheets  and 
to  sail  with  them  up  the  Rhine  to  Worms,  where 
they  finished  the  edition  of  three  thousand  copies 
in  comparative  safety.  A  precious  relic,  con¬ 
taining  the  Prologue  and  twenty-two  chapters  of 
Matthew,  is  all  that  is  known  to  exist  of  this 
memorable  edition,  which  is  in  the  German 
Gothic  type.  In  the  same  year  and  place, 
there  was  printed  another  edition,  in  small-octavo, 
of  which  one  copy  is  extant  in  the  Bristol 
Museum.  During  the  subsequent  ten  years  of  the 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


25 


Translator’s  unquiet  life,  spent  in  labor  and  con¬ 
cealment  from  foes,  more  than  twenty  editions 
of  this  work,  with  repeated  revisions  by  him¬ 
self,  were  passed  through  the  press.  These, 
through  the  agency  of  pious  merchants  and  others, 
were  secretly  conveyed  into  England,  and  there 
with  great  privacy  sold  and  circulated,  not 
without  causing  constant  peril  and  frequent  suf¬ 
fering  to  those  into  whose  hands  they  came. 

\ 

Many  copies  fell  into  the  grasp  of  the  enemy, 
and  were  destroyed  ;  but  very  many  more  were 
secretly  read  and  pondered  in  castles  and  in 
cottages,  and  powerfully  prepared  the  way  for 
the  liberation  of  England  from  the  yoke  of 
Rome.  This  New  Testament  has  been  separate¬ 
ly  printed  in  not  less  than  fifty-six  editions,  as 
well  as  in  fourteen  editions  of  the  Holy  Bible. 

Besides  all  these  impressions  of  the  work  as 
Tyndale  left  it,  it  has  been  five  times  revised  by 
able  translators,  including  those  appointed  by 
King  James  ;  and  still  forms  substantially,  though 
with  very  numerous  amendments,  the  version  in 
common  use.  The  changes  made  in  these  revi¬ 
sions,  though  generally  for  the  better,  were  not 
always  so.  The  substitution  of  the  word  charity, 
where  Tyndale  had  used  love,  was  not  a  happy 

change  ;  neither  was  that  of  church,  where  he  had 

2 


26 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


employed  congregation .  Still,  large  portions  of 
his  work  remain  untouched,  and  are  read  verbally 
as  he  left  them,  except  in  the  matter  of  spelling. 
The  fidelity  of  his  rendering  is  such  as  might  be 
expected  from  his  conscientious  care.  “For  I 
call  God  to  record,”  he  says,  in  his  reply  to  Lord 
Chancellor  More,  “  against  the  day  we  shall  ap¬ 
pear  before  our  Lord  Jesus,  to  give  a  reckoning 
of  our  doings,  that  I  never  altered  one  syllable  of 
God's  Word  against  my  conscience  ;  nor  would 
this  day,  if  all  that  is  in  the  earth,  whether  it  be 
pleasure,  honor,  or  riches,  might  be  given  me.” 

Not  only  was  this  holy  man  faithful  in  his  great 
work,  but  he  was  fully  qualified  for  it  by  his 
scholarship.  His  sound  learning  is  evident 
enough  on  reading  his  pages.  Certain  historians, 
however,  while  acknowledging  his  proficiency  in 
Greek  literature,  have  represented  him  as  having 
little  or  no  acquaintance  with  Hebrew,  and  as 
making  his  translations  of  the  Old  Testament 
from  the  Latin  or  else  the  German.  As  for  Ger¬ 
man,  then  a  rude  speech  just  taking  its  “  form  and 
pressure  ”  from  the  genius  of  Martin  Luther, 
there  is  no  evidence  that  Tyndale  ever  had  much 
acquaintance  with  it.  gut  of  his  knowledge  of 
Hebrew^  there  can  be  no  question.  In  his  answer  to 
Sir  Thomas  More’s  huge  volume  against  him,  he 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


27 


accuses  the  prelates  of  having  lost  the  under¬ 
standing  of  the  plain  text,  “  and  of  the  Greek, 
Latin,  and  especially  of  the  Hebrew,  ivliich  is 
most  of  need  to  be  known ,  and  of  all  phrases,  the 
proper  manner  of  speakings,  and  borrowed  speech 
of  the  Hebrews.'''  In  these  words  he  clearly  in¬ 
dicates  his  critical  familiarity  with  the  Hebraisms 
of  the  New  Testament,  which  contains  so  fhany 
expressions  conformed  rather  to  the  idiom  of  the 
Hebrew  tongue  than  to  that  of  the  Greek.  George 
Joye,  once  occupied  as  his  amanuensis,  who 
turned  against  him,  bears  unwitting  testimony 
upon  this  point.  “I  am  not  afraid,”  he  says,  “  to 
answer  Master  Tyndale  in  this  matter,  for  all  his 
high  learning  in  Hebrew,  Greek  and  Latin, 
$c.”  What  were  the  other  tongues  Joye  referred 
to,  we  learn  from  Herman  Buschius,  a  learned 
professor,  who  was  acquainted  with  Tyndale 
both  at  Marburg  and  Worms.  Spalatin,  the 
friend  of  Luther,  says  in  his  Diary, — “  Buschius 
told  me,  that,  at  Worms,  six  thousand  copies  of 
the  New  Testament  had  been  printed  in  English. 
The  work  was  translated  by  an  Englishman  stay¬ 
ing  there  with  two  others, — a  man  so  skilled  in 
the  seven  languages,  Hebrew,  Greek,  Latin,  Ita¬ 
lian,  Spanish,  English,  and  French,  that  which- 


28 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


ever  he  spake,  you  would  suppose  it  his  native 
tongue.” 

We  must  draw  this  account  of  Tyndale  to  a 
close.*  But  one  curious  incident  must  be  men¬ 
tioned,  which  took  place  in  1529.  Tunstall,  then 
bishop  of  the  wealthy  see  of  Durham,  bought  up 
the  balance  of  an  edition  of  the  New  Testament, 
which  hung  on  Tyndale’s  hands  at  Antwerp,  and 
burned  them.  The  purchase  was  made  through 
one  Packington,  a  merchant  who  secretly  favored 
Tyndale.  The  latter  rejoiced  to  sell  off  his  un¬ 
sold  copies,  being  anxious  to  put  to  press  a  new 
and  corrected  edition,  which. he  was  too  poor  to 
publish  till  thus  furnished  with  the  means  by 
Tunstall’s  simplicity.  A  year  or  two  after, 
George  Constantine,  one  of  Tyndale’s  coadjutors, 
fell  into  the  hands  of  Sir  Thomas  More.  That 
bitter  persecutor  promised  his  prisoner  a  pardon, 
provided  he  would  give  up  the  name  of  the  person 
who  defrayed  the  expense  of  this  Bible-printing 
business.  Constantine,  being  something  of  a 
wag,  and  aware  that  More  was  a  dear  lover  of  a 


*  Those  who  would  know  all  they  can  of  Tyndale  are  referred 
to  the  First  Volume  of  Anderson’s  Annals  of  the  English  Bible, 
which  might  have  been  entitled,  Tyndale  and  his  Times. 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


29 


joke,  accepted  the  offer,  and  amused  the  Chan¬ 
cellor  by  informing  him  that  the  bishop  of  Dur¬ 
ham  was  their  greatest  encourager  ;  for,  by  buy¬ 
ing  up  the  unsold  copies  at  a  good  round  sum,  he 
had  enabled  them  to  produce  a  second  and  im¬ 
proved  edition.  Sir  Thomas  greatly  enjoyed  the 
joke,  and  said  he  had  told  Tunstall  at  the  time, 
that  such  would  be  the  result  of  his  fine  specula¬ 
tion.  “  This,”  as  D’lsraeli  says,  “  was  the  first 
lesson  which  taught  persecutors  that  it  is  easiei 
to  burn  authors  than  books.” 

Early  in  1535,  Tyndale  who  had  been  con¬ 
stantly  hunted  by  the  emissaries  of  his  English 
persecutors,  was  betrayed  by  one  Phillips,  a  tool 
of  Stephen  Gardiner,  the  cruel  and  crafty  bishop 
of  Winchester.  He  suffered  an  imprisonment  of 
more  than  eighteen  months  in  the  castle  of  Vil- 
vorde,  where  he  was  the  means  of  converting  the 
jailor,  the  jailor’s  daughter,  and  others  of  the 
household.  All  that  conversed  with  him  in  the 
castle  bore  witness  to  the  purity  of  his  character; 
and  even  the  Emperor  Charles  the  Fifth’s  Procu¬ 
rator-General,  or  chief  prosecuting  officer,  who 
saw  him  there,  said  that  he  was  “  homo  doctus, 
pius,  et  bonus,” — “  a  learned,  pious,  and  good 
man.”  It  was  Friday,  the  sixth  of  October,  1536, 
when  this  man,  “  of  whom  the  world  was  not 


30 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


worthy,”  and  who  ought  to  be  famed  as  the  no¬ 
blest  and  greatest  benefactor  of  the  English  race 
in  all  the  world,  was  brought  forth  to  die.  Being 
fastened  to  the  stake,  he  cried  out  with  a  fervent 
zeal,  and  a  loud  voice, — “  Lord,  open  the  eyes 
of  the  King  of  England  !”  He  was  then 
♦  strangled,  and  burned  to  ashes.  Thus  departed 
one  for  whom  heaven  was  ready ;  but  for  whom 
earth,  to  this  hour,  has  no  monument,  except 
the  Bible  he  gave  to  so  many  of  her  millions. 

“  lie  lived  unknown 
Till  persecution  dragged  him  into  fame, 

And  chased  him  up  to  Heaven.  His  ashes  flew — 

No  marble  tells  us  whither.  With  his  name 
No  bard  embalms  and  sanctifies  his  song; 

And  history,  so  warm  on  meaner  themes, 

Is  cold  on  this.” 

But  there  is  a  better  world,  where  he  is  not 
forgotten.  “  Also  now,  behold,  his  witness  is 
in  heaven,  and  his  record  is  on  high.” 

Old  John  Foxe,  the  martyrologist,  who  justly 
calls  Tyndale  “  the  Apostle  of  England,”  gives 
the  following  beautiful  sketch  of  the  man —  “  First, 
he  was  a  man  very  frugal,  and  spare  of  body,  a 
great  student  and  earnest  laborer  in  setting  forth 
the  Scriptures  of  God.  He  reserved  or  hallow¬ 
ed  to  himself,  two  days  in  the  week,  which  he 
named  his  pastime,  Monday  and  Saturday.  On 
Monday  he  visited  all  such  poor  men  and  women 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


31 


as  were  fled  out  of  England,  by  reason  of  perse¬ 
cution,  unto  Antwerp;  and  these,  once  well  un¬ 
derstanding  their  good  exercises  and  qualities,  he 
did  very  liberally  comfort  and  relieve  ;  and  in 
like  manner  provided  for  the  sick  and  diseased 
persons.  On  the  Saturday,  he  walked  round  the 
town,  seeking  every  corner  and  hole,  where  he 
suspected  any  poor  person  to  dwell  ;  and  where 
he  found  any  to  be  well  occupied,  and  yet  over- 
burthened  with  children,  or  else  were  aged  and 
weak,  these  also  he  plentifully  relieved.  And 
thus  he  spent  his  two  days  of  pastime ,  as  he 
called  it.  And  truly  his  alms  were  very  large, 
and  so  they  might  well  be ;  for  his  £xhibitio7i 
[i.  e.  pension]  that  he  had  yearly  of  the  English 
merchants  at  Antwerp,  when  living  there,  was 
considerable,  and  that  for  the  most  part  he  be¬ 
stowed  upon  the  poor.  The  rest  of  the  days  of 
the  week  he  gave  wholly  to  his  Book,  wherein  he 
most  diligently  travailed.  When  the  Sunday 
came,  then  wTent  he  to  some  one  merchant’s 
chamber,  or  other,  whither  came  many  other  mer¬ 
chants,  and  unto  them  would  he  read  some  one 
parcel  of  Scripture  ;  the  which  proceeded  so 
fruitfully,  sweetly,  and  gently  from  him,  much 
like  to  the  writing  of  John  the  Evangelist,  that  it 
was  a  heavenly  comfort  and  joy  to  the  audience, 


32 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


to  hear  him  read  the  Scriptures  :  likewise,  after 
dinner,  he  spent  an  hour  in  the  same  manner. 
He  was  a  man  without  any  spot  or  blemish  of 
rancor  or  malice,  full  of  mercy  and  compassion, 
so  that  no  man  living  was  able  to  reprove  him  of 
any  sin  or  crime  ;  although  his  righteousness  and 
justification  depended  not  thereupon  before  God  ; 
but  only  upon  the  blood  of  Christ,  and  his  faith 
upon  the  same.  In  this  faith  he  died,  with  con¬ 
stancy,  at  Vilvorde,  and  now  resteth  with  the 
glorious  company  of  Christ’s  martyrs,  blessedly 
in  the  Lord.” 

The  good  man’s  work  did  not  die  with  him. 
During  the  last  year  of  his  life,  nine  or  more  edi¬ 
tions  of  his  Testament  issued  from'the  press,  and 
found  their  way  into  England  “  thick  and  three¬ 
fold.”  But  what  is  strangest  of  all,  and  is  unex¬ 
plained  to  this  day,  at  the  very  time  when  Tyndale 
by  the  procurement  of  English  ecclesiastics,  and 

by  the  sufferance  of  the  English  king,  was  burned 
at  Vilvorde,  a  folio-edition  of  his  Translation 

was  printed  at  London ,  with  his  name  on  the 
title-page,  and  by  Thomas  Berthelet,  the  king’s 
own  patent  printer.  This  was  the  first  copy  of 
the  Scriptures  ever  printed  on  English  ground. 

The  next  year,  1537,  two  translations  of  the 
entire  Bible,  printed  in  folio  on  the  continent, 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


33 


made  their  appearance  in  England.  One  of 
these  was  Tyndale’s  version,  completed  and 
edited  by  his  devoted  friend  and  assistant, 
John  Rogers,  otherwise  known  as  Thomas  Mat¬ 
thew.  The  other  was  the  work  of  Miles  Cover- 
dale,  afterwards  bishop  of  Exeter. 

Rogers  was  born  at  Deritend  in  Warwickshire, 
about  the  year  1500.  He  was  educated  at  Cam¬ 
bridge,  and  was  for  some  years  chaplain  to  the 
English  factory  at  Antwerp.  He  also  ministered 
for  twelve  years  to  a  German  congregation. 
He  returned  to  England  during  the  reign  of 
Edward  VI.,  in  the  year  1550.  He  was  made 
rector  of  St.  Margaret  Moyses,  and  after  that 
vicar  of  St.  Sepulchre’s  ;  two  of  the  London 
churches.  The  next  year  he  resigned  the  rectory 
on  being  appointed  one  of  the  prebendaries  of 
St.  Paul’s.  When  “  bloody  Mary”  came  to  the 
throne,  he  was  at  once  in  trouble,  but  refused  to 
escape  to  the  continent,  as  he  might  have  done. 
For  half  a  year,  he  remained  a  prisoner  in  his 
own  house  ;  and  during  the  whole  of  1554  he  was 
confined  in  Newgate  among  thieves  and  murder¬ 
ers,  to  some  of  whom  he  was  an  instrument  of 
good.  He  was  very  harshly  and  cruelly  treated, 
and  being  the  first  of  Mary’s  victims,  he  is  honor- 


2* 


34 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


ably  known  as  the  Proto-martyr  of  that  fiery 
persecution.  He  was  burned  alive  at  Smith- 
field,  January  4th,  1555.  He  thus  suffered  with 
great  constancy  and  piety.  His  wife,  whom  he 
had  married  eighteen  years  before,  was  a  German, 
Adriance  de  Weyden.  She  is  sometimes  called 
Prat ,  which  is  the  English  form  of  the  same 
name,  both  meaning  meadow.  He  was  refused 
permission  to  see  her  ;  but  she  met  him  with  all 
her  children,  as  he  was  on  his  way  to  the  fatal 
stake.  It  has  been  much  disputed,  whether  they 
had  nine,  ten,  or  eleven  children.  The  fact 
seems  to  be,  that,  at  the  time  of  his  imprison¬ 
ment  in  Newgate,  they  had  nine  ;  and  another 
was  born  afterwards.  In  documents  written 
during  his  confinement,  he  repeatedly  speaks  of 

V 

his  ten  children.  His  widow  returned  with  her 
fatherless  flock  to  Germany.  Daniel  Rogers, 
probably  the  eldest  child,  lived  to  be  Queen  Eli¬ 
zabeth’s  ambasssador  to  Belgium,  Germany,  and 
Denmark.  Richard  Rogers,  the  famous  Puritan 
minister  of  Weathersfield,  was,  in  all  probability, 
another  son  of  the  martyr  ;  and  if  so,  then  the 
numerous  families  in  New  England  which  trace 
their  descent  from  Richard,  are  descended  from 
the  illustrious  Bible  Translator  and  Protomartyr. 

The  origin  of  Miles  G overdale  is  very  obscure, 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


35 


no  other  person  being  known  of  that  surname.  He 
was  a  native  of  Yorkshire,  and  born  in  1488.  It 
is  said  that  he  graduated  as  Bachelor  of  Canon 
Law,  at  Cambridge,  in  1531.  He  afterwards 
received  a  Doctor’s  degree  from  Tubingen  and 
Cambridge.  He  was  an  Augustine  friar,  and  en¬ 
joyed  the  powerful  protection  of  the  lord  Crum- 
well  while  he  was  the  prime  minister  of  England. 
He  was  an  eminent  scholar  ;  and  was  put  upon 
the  work  of  translating  the  Bible  by  some  influ¬ 
ential  patrons,  who  also  paid  the  cost  of  publica¬ 
tion.  The  first  edition  purports  to  be  faithfully 
translated  out  of  the  German  and  Latin,  and  is 
dedicated  to  Henry  VIII.  and  his  queen,  Anne 
Boleyn.  It  is  dated  1535  ;  but  the  place  where 
it  was  printed  is  uncertain.  It  is  a  mistake  to 
suppose,  as  many  have  done,  that  he  acted  in% 
concert  with  either  Tyndale  or  Rogers.  That  he 
was  skilled  in  the  Hebrew  and  Greek  tongues  is 
certain,  though  he  professes  to  translate  from  the 
German  and  Latin,  in  which  languages  he  had 
five  versions  before  him.  His  work  was  “  set 
forth  with  the  Kynge’s  most  gracious  license 
and  was  warmly  favored  by  the  potent  Crumwell, 
and  by  Cranmer,  archbishop  of  Canterbury. 

But  notwithstanding  all  this  favor,  his  book 
could  not  displace  the  labors  of  the  martyred 


36 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


Tyndale,  which  received  and  retained  such  a  de¬ 
cided  preference,  that  Coverdale  himself  repeat 
edly  edited  impressions  of  the  rival  translation. 
Cranmer  gave  a  decided  preference  to  Rogers’s 
publication  of  his  own  and  Tyndale’s  labors,  and 
entreated  the  Vicar-General  Crumwell  to  exert 
himself  to  procure  the  King’s  consent,  that  it  may 
be  “  read  of  every  person,  without  danger  of  any 
act,  proclamation,  or  ordinance  heretofore  grant¬ 
ed  to  the  contrary,  until  such  time  that  we,  the 
Bishops,  shall  set  forth  a  better  translation,  which 
I  think  will  not  be  till  a  day  after  doomsday.” 
The  license  was  fully  conceded  ;  and  thus,  almost 
before  the  ashes  of  Tyndale  had  had  time  to  cool, 
his  labors  received  the  warm  sanction  and  appro¬ 
bation  of  the  great  men  wdio  had  denied  him  all 
countenance  or  support,  and  who  ten  years  before 
were  quite  indignant  at  his  efforts.  This  trans¬ 
lation  will  never  be  suppressed  again.  It  may  be 
corrected  and  improved,  and  at  times  it  may  be 
denounced  and  burned  ;  and  after  seventy  years, 
King  James’s  fifty  learned  men  may  spend  three 
or  four  years  in  making  it,  as  they  say,  “  more 
smooth  and  easy,  and  agreeable  to  the  text.”  But 
the  work  has  been  substantially  the  basis  of  all 
the  subsequent  editions  of  the  Bible  in  English 
unto  this  day. 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


37 


Grafton,  who  printed  Rogers’s  Bible  just  men¬ 
tioned,  commenced  the  next  folio  edition,  of 
two  thousand  five  hundred  copies,  at  Paris, 
in  1538.  The  reason  for  executing  the  work 
at  that  place  was  the  high  perfection  to  which 
the  art  of  printing  was  then  carried  there.  But 
when  the  edition  was  nearly  completed,  the 
Inquisition  pounced  upon  it,  and  had  nearly 
succeeded  in  destroying  it.  The  printed  sheets, 
however,  were  rescued  and  carried  to  London! 
Also  the  printing  presses  and  types  were  pur¬ 
chased  ;  and  even  the  workmen  removed  with 
them  ;  so  that  in  two  months  more  the  entire 
volume  was  completed  at  London.  At  the  end 
of  these  copies  is  found  the  inscription, — “  The 
Ende  of  the  New  Testament,  and  of  the  whole 
Byble,  fynished  in  Apryll  anno  1539.  It  is  the 
Lord’s  doing.”  The  work  wTas  accomplished  at 
the  procurement  and  expense  of  the  Lord 
Chancellor  Crumwell.  Thus  after  a  struggle  of 
fifteen  years’  continuance,  since  Tyndale  left 
England,  his  Bible  obtains  a  secure  footing 
upon  his  native  soil.  Crumwell,  as  “  vicegerent 
unto  the  King’s  Highness,”  issued  his  injunctions, 
that  a  copy  of  this  book  should  be  conveniently 
placed  in  every  parish-church,  at  the  joint  ex¬ 
pense  of  the  parson  and  the  parishioners  ;  and  no 


38 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


man  should  be  in  any  way  discouraged  from 
reading,  or  hearing  it  read — but  contrariwise,  that 
every  person  should  be  stirred  up  and  exhorted 
to  the  diligent  study  of  the  Word  of  God.  In 
another  of  the  injunctions,  the  clergyman  in 
every  church  is  required  to  make,  or  cause  to  be 
made,  one  sermon ,  every  quarter  of  the  year  at 
least,  wherein  he  shall  “  purely  and  sincerely  de¬ 
clare  the  very  gospel  of  Christ.”  The  issuing  of 
such  an  injunction  gives  a  deplorable  view  of  the 
qualifications  of  the  ministry,  and  of  the  miser¬ 
able  plight  of  the  people  as  to  religious  instruc¬ 
tion,  at  that  day.  An  old  historian,  Strype,  thus 
speaks  of  t-he  interest  excited  by  those  old 
folios,  usually  secured  by  a  chain  to  a  reading- 
desk  attached  to  one  of  the  pillars  in  the 
churches, — “  It  was  wonderful  to  see  with  what 
joy  this  book  of  God  was  received,  not  only 
among  the  learn eder  sort,  but  generally  all 
England  over,  among  all  the  vulgar  and  common 
people  ;  and  with  what  greediness  the  Word  of 
God  was  read,  and  what  resort  to  places  where 
the  reading  of  it  was  !  Every  body  that  could, 
bought  the  book,  or  busily  read  it,  or  got  others 
to  read  it  to  them,  if  they  could  not  themselves. 
Divers  more  elderly  people  learned  to  read  on 
purpose  ;  and  even  little  boys  flocked,  among  the 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


39 


rest,  to  hear  portions  of  the  Holy  Scripture  read.” 
Thus  was  brought  to  pass  that  memorable  say¬ 
ing  of  Tyndale’s  to  the  mitred  Abbots  of  Winch- 
combe  and  Tewksbury, — “  If  God  spare  my  life, 
ere  many  years,  I  will  cause  a  boy  that  drives 
the  plough  to  know  more  of  the  Scriptures  than 
you  do  !”  All  this  was  gall  and  wormwood  to 
Stephen  Gardiner,  and  the  other  popish  clergy, 
who,  as  Foxe  says,  “did  mightily  stomach  and 
malign  the  printing  of  this  Bible.” 

During  the  next  year,  1539,  the  printing  and. 
circulation  of  the  Bible  went  on  with  great  activ¬ 
ity.  The  King  himself,  in  a  public  proclamation, 
urged  upon  his  subjects,  “  the  free  and  liberal 
use  of  the  Bible  in  their  own  maternal  English 
tongue,”  as  the  only  means  by  which  they  could 
learn  their  duty  to  God  or  man. 

In  the  following  year,  those  great  Bibles, 
now  called  “  Cranmer’s  Bibles,”  first  appeared. 
These  were  published  under  the  archbishop’s 
direction,  with  a  preface  written  by  him,  warmly 
pleading  in  behalf  of  the  domestic  reading  of  the 
Word  of  God  ;  and  quoting,  in  favor  of  the  prac¬ 
tice,  some  eloquent  passages  from  Chrysostom 
and  Gregory  the  Nazienzene.  The  following- 
passage  is  taken  from  Chrysostom,  who  insists 
“  that  every  man  should  read  by  himself  at  home, 


40 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


in  the  mean  days  and  time,  between  sermon  and 
sermon  ;  that  when  they  were  at  home  in  their 
houses,  they  should  apply  themselves,  from  time 
to  time,  to  the  reading  of  the  Holy  Scriptures. 
For  the  Holy  Spirit  hath  so  ordered  and  attem¬ 
pered  the  Scriptures,  that  in  them,  as  well  publi¬ 
cans,  fishers  and  shepherds,  may  find  their  edifi¬ 
cation,  as  great  doctors  their  erudition.  But  still 
you  will  say,  I  cannot  understand  it  !  What  mar¬ 
vel  ?  How  shouldest  thou  understand,  if  thou 
wilt  not  read  nor  look  upon  it  ?  Take  the  books 
into  thine  hands,  read  the  whole  story,  and  that 
thou  understandest,  keep  it  well  in  memory  ;  that 
thou  understandest  not,  read  it  again  and  again. 
Here  all  manner  of  persons,  men,  women  ;  young, 
old ;  learned,  unlearned ;  rich,  poor  ;  priests, 
laymen  ;  lords,  ladies  ;  officers,  tenants,  and  mean 
men ;  virgins,  wives,  widows  ;  lawyers,  mer¬ 
chants,  artificers,  husbandmen,  and  all  manner  of 
persons,  of  what  estate  or  condition  soever  they 
be,  may  in  this  Book  learn  all  things,  what  they 
ought  to  believe,  what  they  ought  to  do,  and 
what  they  should  not  do,  as  well  concerning  Al¬ 
mighty  God,  as  also  concerning  themselves  and 
all  others.”  One  edition  of  “  Cranmer’s  Bible,” 
which  varies  but  slightly  from  Tyndale  and  Ro¬ 
gers,  was  issued  this  year,  under  the  royal  com- 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


41 


mand,  sanctioned  in  the  title-page  and  preface 
by  two  prelates  of  the  popish  party,  Cuthbert 
Tunstal,  bishop  of  Durham,  and  Nicolas  Heath, 
bishop  of  Rochester.  So  potent  was  the  will  of 
the  tyrant,  who,  about  that  same  time,  executed 
in  one  day,  and  at  the  same  spot,  three  advocates 
of  the  “  old  learning,”  and  as  many  of  the  “  new 
learning,”  as  popery  and  protestantism  were  then 
respectively  known.  So  impartial  in  cruelties 
and  persecutions  was  that  odious  monster  of  lust, 
and  tyranny.  What  an  age  !  when  men  suffered 
equally  for  not  reading  the  Bible,  and  for  not 
reading  it  with  the  despot’s  eyes.  But  how  won¬ 
derful  are  the  ways  of  divine  Providence  in  so 
ordering  it,  that  the  very  Tunstal  who  was  so 
eager  to  buy  up  and  burn  the  labors  of  Tyndale 
when  printed  at  Antwmrp  but  half  a  score  of  years 
before,  is  now  editing  the  same  at  London,  in 
repeated  editions  !  These  noble  and  finely  print¬ 
ed  folios,  of  which  four  or  five  impressions  were 
made  in  little  more  than  a  year,  were  published 
at  the  expense  and  risk  of  Anthony  Marler,  a 
London  merchant.  Even  the  Bishop  of  London, 
the  “bloody  Bonner,”  chief  butcher  of  the  Pro¬ 
testant  martyrs  in  the  subsequent  “burning 
times”  of  Queen  Mary,  actively  promoted  the 
circulation  and  reading  of  the  Scriptures  in  Eng- 


42 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


]ish.  This  vile  hypocrite,  and  flatterer  of  royalty, 
set  up  six  large  Bibles  for  public  perusal  in  his 
cathedral  of  St.  Paul’s,  where  they  were  read 
aloud  to  attentive  throngs  of  young  and  old.  Ste¬ 
phen  Gardiner,  the  wily  Bishop  of  Winchester, 
and  other  crafty  and  malignant  opposers,  tried 
many  crooked  policies  to  hinder  the  free  course 
of  God’s  word,  but  their  subtle  devices  came  to 
naught.  As  Thomas  Becon,  afterwards  Christ’s 
faithful  martyr,  witnessed,  “  The  most  Sacred 
Bible  is  most  freely  permitted  to  be  read  of  every 
man  in  the  English  tongue.  Many  savor  Christ 
aright,  and  daily  the  number  increaseth,  thanks 
be  to  God  !” 

Tyndale’s  translation  had  been  many  times 
printed  under  the  names  of  Matthew,  Taverner, 
Cranmer,  Tunstal  and  Heath  ;  and  under  all  of 
them,  had  received  the  royal  sanction,  and  had 
been  “  appointed  to  be  read  in  Churches.”  But 
still  the  name  of  Tyndale  was  offensive  to  the 
brutal  Henry  and  his  slavish  parliament.  By  act 
of  parliament,  in  1543,  his  translation,  though  in 
current  and  almost  exclusive  use,  was  branded 
as  crafty,  false,  and  untrue,”  and  was  “forbidden 
to  be  kept  and  used  in  this  realm,  or  elsewhere 
in  any  of  the  King’s  dominions.”  Acts  of  par¬ 
liament  are  said  to  be  so  near  omnipotent,  that 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


13 


“  they  can  do  any  thing  except  changing  a  man 
into  a  woman  but  they  can  no  more  bind  the 
Word  of  God,  than  they  can  change  the  winds 
and  light  of  heaven.  The  same  act  of  parlia¬ 
ment  which  prohibited  this  version  in  one  clause, 
ignorantly  enforced  its  use  in  its  other  clauses, 
and  also  vainly  attempted  to  restrict  its  use  by  the 
“  lower  orders”  of  the  people. 

The  wretched  Henry  VIII.  died  in  1546.  He 
was  succeeded  by  his  only  surviving  son,  Edward 
VI.,  who  held  the  throne  but  six  years  and  five 
months,  when  he  died  of  consumption,  at  the 
age  of  sixteen.  This  intellectual  and  pious 
child  was  one  of  those  “  who  trembled  at  God’s 
Word,’5  which  he  loved  and  venerated;  and  which 
had  “  free  course  and  was  glorified”  during  his 
brief  reign.  At  his  coronation,  three  swords 
were  brought,  to  be  carried  before  him,  in  token 
that  three  realms  were  subject  to  his  sway. 
The  precocious  prince  said  that  yet  another 
sword  must  be  brought ;  and  when  the  attend¬ 
ing  nobles  asked  what  sword  that  might  be,  he 
answered, — “  The  Bible  !”  That,  said  he,  “  is 
the  sword  of  the  Spirit,  and  to  be  preferred  be¬ 
fore  these  swords.  That  ought,  in  all  right,  to 
govern  us,  who  use  the  others  for  the  people’s 
safety,  by  God’s  appointment.”  Adding  some 


44 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


similar  expressions,  he  commanded  the  Sacred 
Volume  to  be  brought,  and  to  be  borne  reverent¬ 
ly  before  him  in  the  grand  procession.  In  the 
course  of  his  reign,  the  Bible  cause  prospered 
greatly.  At  least  thirty-five  editions  of  the  New 
Testament  appeared,  and  fourteen  editions  of  the 
whole  Bible  in  English. 

Edward’s  first  Parliament  repealed  the  Act 
passed  by  his  father’s  last  parliament  against  the 
labors  of  Tyndale.  Cranmer,  who  was  at  the 
head  of  the  regency,  made  no  attempt  to  press 
the  use  of  his  own  correction  or  revision  of  Tyn- 
dale’s  version  ;  and  most  of  the  editions  followed 
the  older  copies,  which  were  the  more  popular. 
When  Henry  died,  there  were  fourteen  printing- 
offices  in  England.  In  Edward’s  time  these  were 
increased  to  fifty-seven  ;  of  which,  not  less  than 
thirty-one,  and  these  the  most  respectable,  were 
engaged  either  in  printing  or  publishing  the  Sa¬ 
cred  Scriptures.  This  short  reign  was  a  period 
of  unexampled  activity  in  the  good  work,  which 
was  sadly  interrupted  by  the  lamented  death  of 
the  king  in  1553. 

His  reign  was  followed  by  that  of  his  sister,  the 
bigoted  and  melancholy  Mary  ;  who,  during  her 
reign  of  five  years  and  more,  did  her  utmost  to 
suppress  the  Word  of  God  in  her  realm,  and  to 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


45 


restore  the  authority  of  Romish  corruptions  and 
pretended  traditions.  It  was  not  till  she  had 
been  more  than  a  year  and  a  half  on  the  throne, 
that  she  felt  herself  seated  firmly  enough  to  dip 
her  hands  in  the  blood  of  her  Protestant  subjects. 
During  this  time,  hundreds  who  saw  the  gradual 
rising  of  the  storm  of  persecution,  fled  for  shelter 
to  continental  Europe.  Nearly  one  thousand  of 
these  exiles  were  learned  Englishmen,  who  were 
scattered  abroad  in  many  cities.  Meanwhile,  in 
England,  two  hundred  and  eighty-eight  faithful 
martyrs,  including  one  arch-bishop,  four  bishops, 
many  clergymen  and  doctors  in  divinity,  as  also 
men,  women  and  children  of  every  rank  in  life, 
were  committed  to  the  flames  for  their  love  to 
God’s  Word,  and  their  adherence  to  its  teachings. 
The  first  who  thus  suffered  was  that  John  Rogers 
who  had  done  so  much  toward  the  translation, 
printing,  and  circulation  of  the  Bible  in  English. 
There  is  now,  in  this  country,  in  the  hands  of  one 
of  his  descendants,  a  copy  of  the  Bible  which  had 
been  for  the  private  use  of  that  holy  martyr, 
whose  effigy  makes  such  a  prominent  figure  in 
the  famous  New  England  Primer.  Many  others 
were  famished  to  death,  or  pined  and  expired  in 
unwholesome  dungeons.  Miles  Coverdale,  who 


46 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


hacl  been  so  active  in  the  business  of  translating 
and  editing  the  Bible,  had  been  made  Bishop  of 
Exeter  by  Edward  VI.  ;  but  two  years  after,  on 
the  accession  of  Mary,  he  lost  his  office,  and  was 
imprisoned  for  two  years  and  a  half.  He  was 
several  times  examined  before  his  inquisitors,  and 
was  in  extreme  peril  of  his  life.  But  in  February, 
1555,  he  was  allowed  to  leave  the  realm,  at  the 
intercession  of  Christian  II.,  King  of  Denmark.* 
During  the  Marian  persecution,  there  was  no 
proclamation  expressly  prohibiting  the  reading 
of  the  Bible,  or  calling  in  the  copies  to  be 
burned.  Still  several  occasions  are  recorded,  in 
which  copies  of  the  sacred  volume  were  con¬ 
signed  to  the  flames.  Very  many  were  carried 
abroad  by  the  numerous  fugitives.  And  many 
were  concealed  in  private  places.  Some  were 
even  built  up  in  closets  whose  doors  were  con¬ 
cealed  by  masonry. 


*  In  1559,  after  Mary’s  miserable  death,  Coverdale  returned  to 
England ;  bnt  being  now  a  zealous  non-conformist,  he  repeatedly 
refused  to  resume  his  bishopric.  He  continued  to  preach,  in  e. 
somewhat  private  way,  as  long  as  he  lived  ;  and  died  most  hap 
pily,  February,  1569,  in  the  eighty- first  year  of  his  age,  much 
venerated  for  his  virtues,  labors,  and  sufferings,  and  regarded  as  a 
“firebrand  plucked  out  of  the  burning.” 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


47 


“Fierce  whiskered  guards  that  volume  sought  in  vain, 
Enjoyed  by  stealth,  and  hid  with  anxious  pain  ; 

"While  all  around  was  misery  and  gloom, 

This  shewed  the  boundless  bliss  beyond  the  tomb  ; 

Freed  from  the  venal  priest, — the  feudal  rod, 

i  r 

It  led  the  sufferer’s  weary  steps  to  God : 

And  when  his  painful  course  on  earth  wras  run, 

This,  his  chief  wealth,  descended  to  his  son.” 

It  is  a  remarkable  fact,  that,  while  of  a  larcre 
proportion  of  the  many  books  printed  in  England 
up  to  this  date,  1558,  not  a  vestige  is  to  be  found  in 
our  day,  there  is  scarce  one  of  the  many  editions 
of  the  Bible  and  Testament  of  which  one  or  more 
copies  are  not  preserved.  Such  has  ever  been 
God’s  watchful  care  in  the  preservation  of  his 
blessed  Book. 

The  cessation  of  open  operations  in  publish¬ 
ing  the  Bible  in  England  was  attended  by  one 
signal  advantage.  It  gave  opportunity  for  a  new 
and  very  important  revision  of  the  translation. 

The  great  work  first  effected  by  the  exiled 
Tyndale  some  twenty-five  years  before,  during 
his  banishment  in  Europe,  was  now  ably  revised 
by  another  exiled  scholar,  and  again  introduced 
into  England  when  every  port  seemed  to  be  shut 
against  it.  This  was  the  celebrated  “Geneva 
Testament,”  which  is  a  reprint  of  Tyndale’s, 
after  carefully  comparing  it  once  more  with  the 


48  INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 

Greek  original,  and  various  translations  in  other 
tongues,  and  making  many  decided  improvements, 
forming  by  far  the  best  form  of  the  English  ver¬ 
sion,  which  had  till  then  appeared.  The  first 
edition,  which  is  now  rare,  is  noted  for  the  beauty 
of  the  type  and  paper.  It  left  the  press  in  June, 
1557.  It  is  the  first  English  Testament  divided 
into  verses,  and  it  led  the  way  to  a  revision  of 
the  whole  Bible.  It  is  not  positively  known  by 
whom  this  good  work  was  done  ;  but  there  is  no 
doubt  but  that  the  person  was  William  Whitting- 
ham.  He  was  a  native  of  Lanchester,  near  Dur¬ 
ham,  born  in  1524.  He  was  of  a  good  family,  a 
Fellow  of  one  of  the  Colleges  at  Oxford;  and 
had  spent  three  years  in  foreign  travel,  and  at  the 
Universities  in  France.  When  Mary  mounted 
the  throne,  he  betook  himself  first  to  Frankfort 
in  Germany.  A  year  later,  in  1555,  he  removed 
to  Geneva,  where  he  was  ordained  as  minister  of 
the  English  Congregation,  of  some  hundred  mem¬ 
bers,  and  where  he  married  Catharine  Chauvin, 
the  sister  of  John  Calvin.*  Having  issued  the 
New  Testament  of  the  Geneva  version,  he  was 
aided  to  some  extent  by  two  of  his  learned  fellow*- 
exiles  in  revising  the  entire  Scriptures,  on  which 


*  Calvinus  is  the  Latin,  form  of  the  French  name  Chauvin. 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


49 


they  were  engaged  night  and  day  in  1558,  the 
year  that  hapless  Mary  died  of  a  broken  heart.* 
They  continued  their  labors  till  April,  1560,  when 
the  whole  work  was  finished.  The  expense  was 
defrayed  by  the  wealthier  members  of  the  Eng¬ 
lish  Congregation  at  Geneva.  Of  this  revision, 
numerous  editions  were  printed  in  the  course  of 
the  next  eighty  years.  It  was  several  times  re¬ 
printed  even  after  King  James’s  translation  was 
published,  as  it  was  very  popular  with  the  Puri 
tans  on  account  of  the  numerous  very  brief  mar¬ 
ginal  annotations.  As  soon  as  the  first  edition 
had  passed  the  press  at  Geneva,  the  editors  re¬ 
turned  to  England. 

Whittingham,  soon  after,  went  to  France  as 
chaplain  to  the  British  ambassador,  the  Earl  of 
Bedford.  On  his  return,  he  acted  in  the  same 
capacity  for  the  Earl  of  Warwick.  Through  the 
influence  of  that  excellent  nobleman,  he  was  ap¬ 
pointed  to  the  deanery  of  Durham,  in  1563,  not¬ 
withstanding  his  sturdy  opposition  to  the  popish 


*  One  of  the  old  Protestant  ministers  preached  a  funeral  ser¬ 
mon  for  her,  on  the  text, — “  Go,  see  now  this  cursed  woman,  and 
bury  her ;  for  she  is  a  king’s  daughter.”  2  Ki.  ix.  34.  "When  he 
was  called  in  question  for  it,  it  was  decided  that  the  text  was  the 
most  objectionable  part  of  the  sermon  ! 


50 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


ceremonies  retained  in  the  Church  of  England. 
His  abilities  were  so  highly  esteemed,  that  when 
the  Secretary  Cecil  became,  by  promotion,  Lord 
Treasurer  Burleigh,  the  vacant  secretaryship 
might  have  been  taken  by  Mr.  Whittingham,  had 
he  desired  it.  He  was  repeatedly  impleaded  in 
the  ecclesiastical  courts  for  his  non-conformity, 
and  for  his  presbyterial  ordination  at  Geneva ; 
and  he  was  once  excommunicated  by  the  Arch¬ 
bishop  of  York.  On  appeal  to  Queen  Elizabeth, 
she  appointed  Henry,  Earl  of  Huntington,  who 
was  Lord  President  of  the  Council  of  the  North, 
and  Dr.  Hutton,  Dean  of  York,  as  a  commission 
to  examine  and  decide  the  case.  The  Commission 
boldly  declared,  “that  Mr.  Whittingham  was  or¬ 
dained  in  a  better  sort  than  even  the  Archbishop 
himself.”  Another  attempt  on  the  part  of  that 
dignitary  succeeded  no  better.  Before  these  pros¬ 
ecutions  were  ended,  Mr.  Whittingham  died  in 
possession  of  his  benefice,  in  1579,  and  in  the 
sixty-fifth  year  of  his  age.  He  was  buried  in  the 
cathedral  at  Durham.  He  was  an  eminently 
pious  and  powerful  preacher,  and  an  ornament  to 
religion  and  learning,  to  which  he  greatly  contrib¬ 
uted  by  his  publications,  and  chiefly  by  his  agency 
in  the  revision  of  the  English  Bible.  He  was 
the  author  of  several  of  those  metrical  versions 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


51 


of  the  Psalms,  which  are  still  sung  in  the  Epis¬ 
copal  Churches  of  England  and  America,  even 
as  Tyndale’s  prose  translations  of  the  Psalms  are 
still  printed  and  read  in  the  Book  of  Common 
Prayer.* 

Anthony  Gilby,  who  was  associated  with  Mr. 
Whittingham  in  preparing  the  Geneva  Bible,  was 
born  in  Lincolnshire,  and  educated  in  Christ’s 
College,  Cambridge,  where  he  acquired  a  very 
exact  and  critical  skill  in  the  Latin,  Greek,  and 
Hebrew  languages  ;  and  became  a  bold  reformer 
as  to  the  habits,  ceremonies,  and  corruptions  of 
the  national  Church.  When  Queen  Mary  went 
about  her  bloody  and  burning  work,  he  fled  to  the 
continent,  tarrying  most  of  his  time  at  Geneva. 
Soon  after  the  accession  of  Elizabeth  to  the 
throne, ,he  wTent  back  to  England,  and  was  placed 
in  the  wealthy  vicarage  of  Ashby-de-la-Zouch, 
where  he  lived  “as  great  as  a  bishop.”  He  was 
a  “famous  and  reverend  divine,”  and  God  won¬ 
derfully  blessed  his  zealous  and  faithful  ministry. 
He  stood  in  the  highest  esteem  with  the  best  and 
noblest  in  the  land,  which  did  not  screen  him  from 


*  Thomas  Stemhold,  John  Hopkins,  and  Thomas  Norton,  who 
with  William  Whittingham  prepared  the  Psalms  in  metre,  were 
all  strongly  puritanical  men,  and  eminent  in  their  day. 


52 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


being  harassed  for  his  non-conformity.  He  lived 
to  a  great  age,  but  the  time  of  his  death  is  un¬ 
known.  He  was  noted  for  a  flaming  zeal  against 
the  errors  and  abominations  of  papistry,  and  all 
the  remnants  and  patches  of  it  retained  in  the 
Church  of  England. 

The  other  helper  of  Mr.  Whittingham  at  Ge¬ 
neva  was  Thomas  Sampson,  D.  D.,  born  about 
1517,  and  educated  at  Oxford.  He  was  a  stout 
Protestant  and  Puritan,  and  a  very  great  scholar. 
In  1551,  he  became  rector  of  Allhallows,  Bread- 
street,  London  ;  and  next  year  Dean  of  Winches¬ 
ter.  He  continued  a  famous  preacher  of  God’s 
Word,  till  the  death  of  King  Edward.  After  that, 
he  was  obliged  to  live  in  concealment  ;  and  at 
last,  with  great  difficulty,  escaped  from  his  coun¬ 
try.  At  Geneva  he  found  the  best  of  employ¬ 
ments  in  aiding  to  perfect  the  Bible  in  English. 
On  returning  to  England  under  the  reign  of  Eliz¬ 
abeth,  he  was  offered  the  bishopric  of  Norwich, 
and  declined  it  from  conscientious  scruples.  He 
was  noted  in  the  pulpit  for  his  wonderful  memory 
and  fine  elocution  ;  and  was  for  several  years  one 
of  the  most  popular  court-preachers.  In  1560, 
he  became  Dean  of  Christ  Church,  Oxford.  The 
numerous  men  distinguished  for  their  learning, 

o  O  ' 

and  who  were  connected  with  that  College,  thus 


I N  TRODUCTORYNARRATIVE. 


53 


speak  of  him,  in  a  letter  soliciting  his  appoint¬ 
ment, — “After  well  considering  all  the  learned 
men  in  the  land,  they  found  none  to  be  compared 
to  him  for  singular  learning  and  great  piety,  hav¬ 
ing  the  praise  of  all  men.  And  it  is  very  doubt¬ 
ful  whether  there  is  a  better  man,  a  greater  lin¬ 
guist ,  a  more  complete  scholar,  a  more  profound 
divine.”  In  1564,  he  was  arraigned  for  non-con¬ 
formity  before  the  odious  High  Commission  Court, 
and  deprived  of  his  office,  and  confined.  It  was 
not  without  much  trouble,  that  he  procured  his 
release.  He  was  made  Prebendary  of  Pancras  in 
St.  Paul’s  Cathedral  in  1570.  In  1573,  having 
suffered  some  from  a  paralytic  affection,  he  was 
appointed  to  the  mastership  of  the  Hospital  at 
Leicester,  a  position  of  influence,  where  he  made 
himself  very  useful  for  sixteen  years,  till  his  death 
in  1589,  at  the  age  of  seventy-two. 

It  is  evident  that  these  three  companions  in  ex¬ 
ile  were  abundantly  qualified  for  the  work  of  re¬ 
vising  the  translation,  and  publishing  what  for 
nearly  eighty  years  was  the  favorite  household 
Bible  of  the  English  nation.  It  was  a  wonderful 
providence  of  God,  which  drove  those  learned  ex¬ 
iles  abroad  to  give  them  the  opjmrtunity  for 
making  this  improved  translation,  and  prepared 
the  way  for  its  free  introduction  among  the  Eng 


54 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


lish  people  as  soon  as  it  was  ready.  Thus  the 
persecution  of  the  Scriptures,  like  that 

“  Vaulting  ambition  which  o’erleaps  itself. 

And  falls  onth’  other  side,” 

defeats  its  own  object,  and  helps  on  what  it  wTould 
have  destroyed.  Haman,  while  pursuing  in  his 
pride  the  destruction  of  the  whole  Jewish  race, 
wTas  elevated  at  least  “  fifty  cubits”  higher  than 
he  had  ever  thought  or  dreamt  of  ! 

During  the  reign  of  Elizabeth,  “  wdiose  inclina¬ 
tions,”  says  Coleridge.  “  wrere  as  popish  as  her 
interests  were  protestant,”  the  printing  of  English 
Bibles  went  on,  at  first,  more  by  connivance  than 
by  royal  approbation.  Soon  after  she  began  to 
reign,  a  gentleman  somewhat  publicly  said  to  her, 
that  she  had  released  many  persons  from  unde¬ 
served  confinement  ,  but  that  there  were  still 
four  prisoners  of  most  excellent  character,  who 
craved  liberation.  On  her  asking  who  they  were, 
the  courtier  replied,  that  they  were  the  holy 
Evangelists,  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke,  and  John  ; 
and  he  craved  that  they  might  have  leave  to  walk 
abroad  as  formerly  in  the  English  tongue.  To 
this  the  politic  spinster  replied,  that  she  “  would 
first  know  the  minds  of  the  prisoners,  whether 
they  desired  any  such  liberty.”  But  though  the 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


55 


sovereign  refrained  from  committing  herself  at 
the  outset,  the  year  1561  had  not  expired,  before 
new  editions  of  the  four  versions  of  Tyndale,  Co- 
verdale,  Cranmer,  and  the  Geneva  exiles,  were 
in  free  circulation. 

It  was  in  1568,  when  Elizabeth  had  been  queen 
for  ten  years,  that  the  “  Bishop’s  Bible”  was  pub¬ 
lished  under  the  supervision  of  Parker,  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury.  This  text  was  most  carefully  re¬ 
vised  by  fifteen  very  learned  men,  the  majority  of 
whom  were  bishops  ;  and  hence  the  name  of  the 
work.  As  each  of  these  divines  completed  his 
share,  the  Archbishop  gave  to  their  labors  a  final 
revision.  Thus  the  translation  was  still  further 
perfected.  This  first  imprint  was  the  most  splen¬ 
did  that  had  ever  been  issued.  It  is  a  magnifi¬ 
cent  folio,  and  contains  nearly  a  hundred  and  fifty 
engravings.  It  has  long  been  supposed  that  this 
revision  was  undertaken  at  the  queen’s  command; 
but  such  was  not  the  case.  It  was  eight  times 
printed  before  the  death  of  Parker  in  1775  ;  but 
was  not  appointed,  like  Cranmer’s  Bible,  “to  be 
read  in  churches.” 

Up  to  this  time,  the  Geneva  Bible  had  been  re 
peatedly  printed  on  the  continent,  and  mostly  a« 
Geneva  itself;  but  not  in  England.  Yet  this  was 
decidedly  the  people's  Bible,  and  enjoyed  the 


56 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


popular  preference  for  domestic  use.  From  that 
time,  almost  all  the  Bibles,  for  more  than  thirty- 
five  years,  were  issued  from  the  press  of  the  Bar¬ 
kers,  father  and  son  ;  whereas  previously  it  had 
afforded  employment  to  a  large  number  of  differ¬ 
ent  printers.  While  Elizabeth,  “  the  throned 
vestal,”  was  in  all  her  glory,  not  less  than  one 
hundred  and  thirty  different  editions  of  the  Bible 
and  Testament  were  issued  ;  eighty-five  of  them 
being  of  the  Bible,  and  forty-five  of  the  Testa¬ 
ment.  Of  these  editions  ninety,  or  more  than 
two-thirds,  were  of  the  Geneva  version.  Of  the 
eighty-five  issues  of  the  entire  Bible,  sixty  were 
of  this  latter  version.  The  sale  of  so  many  cop¬ 
ies,  and  at  tenfold  higher  prices  than  are  paid 
now,  was  a  “  sign  of  the  times,”  and  evinced  the 
growing  eagerness  of  the  nation  for  the  precious 
Book  of  God. 

When  James  I.  succeeded  to  the  kingdom  in 

1603,  they  who  desired  a  thorough  reformation  in 

the  Church  of  England,  and  against  whom  the 

terrible  Elizabeth  had  ever  “  erected  her  lion- 

port,”  then  indulged  high  hopes  of  obtaining  their 

desires.  Ilis  Presbyterian  education,  and  the 

* 

hypocritical  professions  he  had  made  with  real 
Stuart  perfidy,  had  raised  their  hopes  only  to  dash 
them  more  cruelly  to  the  dust.  He  soon  gave 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


57 


them  to  understand,  that,  in  his  view,  “  presby¬ 
tery  and  monarchy  agreed  together  as  well  as 
God  and  the  devil  and  loudly  proclaimed  his 
famous  maxim  of  king-craft , — “  No  bishop,  no 
king  !”  As  he  entered  his  new  realm  of  Eng¬ 
land,  he  received  what  was  called  the  “  millena¬ 
ry  petition,”  because  it  purported  to  hear  the 
names  of  about  a  thousand  ministers,  though  the 
exact  number  of  signers  is  not  known.  The  pe¬ 
tition  craved  reformation  of  sundry  abuses  in  the 
worship,  ministry,  revenues,  and  discipline  of  the 
national  Church.  The  Universities  uttered  their 
remonstrances  against  this  petition.  The  king, 
who  was  eminently  qualified  to  perform  the  lead¬ 
ing  part  in  “  the  royal  game  of  Goose,”  under¬ 
took  to  settle  the  business  at  a  conference  be¬ 
tween  the  parties,  at  which  he  was  to  moderate 
and  decide.  He  sent  out  a  proclamation,  “  touch¬ 
ing  a  meeting  for  the  hearing,  and  for  the  deter¬ 
mining,  things  pretended  to  be  amiss  in  the 
Church.”  This  conference  was  held  at  Hampton 
Court,  on  the  14th,  16th,  and  18th  days  of  Janu¬ 
ary,  1604.  On  the  part  of  the  Puritans,  the  king 
summoned  four  of  their  divines,  selected  by  him¬ 
self.  To  match  them,  he  called  nine  bishops,  as 
many  cathedral  clergymen,  and  four  divinity  pro¬ 
fessors  from  Cambridge  and  Oxford.  It  soon  be- 


58 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


came  manifest,  that  the  only  object  of  the  meeting 
was  to  give  the  king  an  opportunity  to  declare 
his  bitter  hostility  to  the  Puritans,  who  were 
brow-beaten,  insulted,  and  trampled  upon  by  the 
tyrant  and  his  ghostly  minions.  The  Puritans 
were  confuted,  “  as  bitter  bishop  Bale”  said  on 
another  occasion,  “with  seven  solid  arguments, 
thus  reckoned  up,  Authority,  Violence,  Craft, 
Fraud,  Intimidation,  Terror  and  Tyranny.”*  The 
monarch  roundly  declared  that  he  would  “  harry 
out  of  the  land”  all  who  would  not  conform  their 
consciences  to  his  dictation. 

One  good  result,  however,  came  from  this 
“  mock  conference,”  as  it  was  usually  called  by 
the  oppressed  Puritans.  Among  other  of  their 
demands,  Dr.  Reynolds,  who  was  the  chief  speak¬ 
er  in  their  behalf,  requested  that  there  might  be 
a  new  translation  of  the  Bible,  without  note  or 
comment.  In  an  account  of  the  proceedings, 
given  by  Patrick  Galloway,  one  of  the  King’s 
Scotch  chaplains,  who  was  present,  and  whose 
account  was  corrected  by  the  king’s  own  hand,  it 
is  set  forth  as  the  second  of  the  articles  noted 


*  In  the  nervous  Latin  of  the  crabbed  ex-bishop  of  Ossory, 
the  arguments  run  thus  ;  Authoritate,  Vi,  Arte,  Fraude,  Metu, 
Terrore  et  Tyrannide. 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE . 


59 


among  things  to  be  reformed,  and  presented  by 
Reynolds, — “  That  a  translation  be  made  of  the 
whole  Bible,  as  consonant  as  can  be  to  the  origin¬ 
al  Hebrew  and  Greek  ;  and  this  to  be  set  out  and 
printed,  without  any  marginal  notes ,  and  only  to 
be  used  in  all  churches  of  England,  in  time  of 
divine  service.”  To  this  demand  the  King  ac¬ 
ceded  ;  but  it  was  not  till  nearly  six  months  after 
the  Hampton  Court  Conference,  that  the  selec¬ 
tion  of  scholars  to  undertake  the  work  was  made. 
Their  labors  began  soon  after,  and  the  first  revis¬ 
ion  of  the  sacred  text  by  the  whole  company  oc¬ 
cupied  about  four  years.  The  second  revision, 
by  a  committee  of  twelve  of  them,  took  up  nine 
months  more.  The  sheets  were  then  some  two 
years  in  passing  through  the  press  ;  and  the  new 
and  immortal  version  was  finished  and  published 
in  1611,  after  seven  years  of  most  thorough  and 
careful  preparation. 

Thus  it  came  to  pass,  that  the  English  Bible 
received  its  present  form,  after  a  fivefold  revision 
of  the  translation  as  it  was  left  in  1537  by  Tyndale 
and  Rogers.  During  this  interval  of  seventy-four 
years,  it  had  been  slowly  ripening,  till  this  last-, 
most  elaborate,  and  thorough  revision  under  King 
James  matured  the  work  for  coming  centuries.  It 
is  a  very  great  advantage,  that  the  work,  which 


60 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


was  well  done  at  first,  had  the  benefit  of  this  ac¬ 
cumulated  labor  and  pious  care  bestowed  upon  it 
by  so  many  zealous  and  erudite  scholars  in  long 
succession.  To  this  is  to  be  ascribed  much  of  its 
intrinsic  excellence  and  lasting  popularity.  Its 
origin  and  history  so  strongly  commended  it,  that 
it  speedily  came  into  general  use  as  the  standard 
version,  by  the  common  consent  of  the  English 
people  ;  and  required  no  act  of  parliament  nor 
royal  proclamation  to  establish  its  authority.* 
Some  of  the  older  versions  continued  to  be  re¬ 
printed  for  forty  years  ;  but  no  long  time  elapsed 
ere  the  common  version  quietly  and  exclusively 
occupied  the  field.  Who  believes  it  possible  that 
another  translation  can  be  produced  in  our  time, 
which  shall  command  the  like  acceptance  ;  and 
without  strife  or  controversy,  take,  among  the 


*  Says  Dr.  Lee,  Principal  of  the  University  of  Edinburgh ; 
“  I  do  not  find  that  there  was  any  canon,  proclamation,  or  act 
of  parliament,  to  enforce  the  use  of  it.”  “The  present  version,” 
says  Dr.  Symonds,  as  quoted  in  Anderson's  Annals,  “  appears 
to  have  made  its  way,  without  the  interposition  of  any  author¬ 
ity  whatsoever  ;  for  it  is  not  easy  to  discover  any  traces  of  a  pro¬ 
clamation,  canon  or  statute  published  to  enforce  the  use  of  it.” 
It  has  been  lately  ascertained,  that  neither  the  king’s  private 
purse,  nor  the  public  exchequer,  contributed  a  farthing  toward 
the  expense  of  the  translation  or  publication  of  the  work. 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


61 


English-speaking  population  of  the  globe,  the 
place  now  held  by  our  venerable  version  ? 

This  translation  was  completed  at  a  fortunate 
time.  The  English  language  had  passed  through 
many  and  great  changes,  and  had  at  last  reached 
the  very  height  of  its  purity  and  strength.  The 
Bible  has  ever  since  been  the  grand  English  clas¬ 
sic.  It  is  still  the  noblest  monument  of  the  pow¬ 
er  of  the  English  speech.  It  is  the  pattern  and 
standard  of  excellence  therein.  It  is  the  most 
full  and  refreshing  of  all  the  “  wells  of  English 
undefiled.”  It  has  given  a  fixed  character  to  our 
language.  It  is  as  intelligible  now  as  when  it 
was  first  imprinted  ;  and  will  be  as  easily  under¬ 
stood  by  readers  of  coming  centuries  as  by  those 
of  the  past  and  the  present.  It  is  singularly  free 
from  what  used  to  be  called  “  ink-horn  terms 
that  is,  such  words  as  are  more  used  in  writing 
than  in  speaking,  and  are  not  well  understood 
except  by  scholars.  “  In  the  church,  among  the 
congregation,”  says  Luther,  “we  ought  to  speak 
as  we  use  at  home,  in  the  house, — the  plain 
mother-tongue,  which  every  one  understandeth 
and  is  acquainted  withal.” 

That  King  James’s  scholars  wisely  clave  to  the 
language  of  the  cottage  and  the  market-place, 
appears  by  what  Thomas  Fuller  wrote  of  Notting- 


62  INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 

hamshire  in  1662;  “The  language  of  the  com¬ 
mon  people  is  generally  the  best  of  any  shire  in 
England.  A  proof  whereof,  when  a  boy,  I  re¬ 
ceived  from  a  hand-laboring  man  therein,  which 
since  hath  convinced  my  judgment.  ‘We  speak,  I 
believe,’  said  he,  ‘as  good  English  as  any  shire  in 
England  ;  because,  though  in  the  singing-Psalms 
some  words  are  used  to  make  the  metre,  unknown 
to  us,  yet  the  last  translation  of  the  Bible,  which 
no  doubt  was  done  by  those  learned  men  in  the 
best  English,  agreeth  perfectly  with  the  common 
speech  of  our  county.’”  Thus  we  came  to  have 
a  version  as  easy  of  comprehension  as  the  nature 
of  the  case  will  admit.  It  is  the  most  precious 
boon  possessed  by  the  vast  masses,  to  whom  it 
speaks  “in  their  own  tongue  the  wonderful  works 
of  God.”  Well  does  the  Translators’  Preface 
speak  of  God’s  Sacred  Word  as  “  that  inestimable 
treasure  which  excell eth  all  the  riches  of  the 
earth.”  And  well  was  it  said  of  them  by  that 
same  Thomas  Fuller  ;  “These,  with  Jacob,  roll¬ 
ed  away  the  stone  from  the  mouth  of  the  well  of 
life  ;  so  that  now  even  Rachels,  weak  women,  may 
freely  come,  both  to  drink  themselves,  and  water 
the  flocks  of  their  families  at  the  same.” 

But  were  those  ancient  scholars  competent  to 
make  their  translation  correct ,  as  well  as  plain  ? 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


63 


This  is  a  question  of  the  utmost  importance  in 
estimating-  the  value  of  their  work,  and  the  de¬ 
gree  of  confidence  to  which  it  is  entitled  among 
readers  who  cannot  examine  for  themselves 
the  original  tongues  of  the  inspired  writers.  It  is, 
therefore,  the  principal  object  of  this  little  volume 
to  present  brief  biographical  sketches  of  our 
Translators.  By  showing  who  were  the  men, 
and  what  were  their  qualifications  for  their  work, 
we  shall  best  enable  the  common  reader  to  de¬ 
cide  for  himself,  how  far  he  may  depend  upon 
their  ability  and  fidelity.  Considering  the  bound¬ 
less  circulation  and  unapproachable  popularity  of 
their  work,  it  seems  most  strange  that  no  person, 
up  to  this  time, — not  even  in  the  mother-country, 
— has  attempted  to  do  this,  except  in  the  most 
slight  and  compendious  manner. 

As  to  the  capability  of  those  men,  we  may  say 
again,  that,  by  the  good  providence  of  God,  their 
work  was  undertaken  in  a  fortunate  time.  Not 
only  had  the  English  language,  that  singular  com¬ 
pound,  then  ripened  to  its  full  perfection,  but  the 
study  of  Greek,  and  of  the  oriental  tongues,  and 
of  rabbinical  lore,  had  then  been  carried  to  a 
greater  extent  in  England  than  ever  before  or 
since.  This  particular  field  of  learning  has  nev¬ 
er  been  so  highly  cultivated  among  English  di- 


64 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


vines  as  it  was  at  that  day.  To  evince  this  fact, 
so  far  as  necessary  limits  will  admit,  it  will  be 
requisite  to  sketch  the  characters  and  scholarship 
of  those  men,  who  have  made  all  coming  ages 
their  debtors.  When  this  pleasing  task  is  done, 
it  is  confidently  expected  that  the  reader  of  these 
pages  will  yield  to  the  conviction,  that  all  the 
colleges  of  Great  Britain  and  America,  even  in 
this  proud  day  of  boastings,  could  not  bring  to¬ 
gether  the  same  number  of  divines  equally  quali¬ 
fied  by  learning  and  piety  for  the  great  underta¬ 
king.  Few  indeed  are  the  living  names  worthy 
to  be  enrolled  with  those  mighty  men.  It  would 
be  impossible  to  convene  out  of  any  one  Christian 
denomination,  or  out  of  all,  a  body  of  translators, 
on  whom  the  whole  Christian  community  would 
bestow  such  confidence  as  is  reposed  upon  that 
illustrious  company,  or  who  would  prove  them¬ 
selves  as  deserving  of  such  confidence.  Very 
many  self-styled  “  improved  versions”  of  the  Bi¬ 
ble,  or  of  parts  of  it,  have  been  paraded  before 
the  world,  but  the  religious  public  has  doomed 
them  all,  without  exception,  to  utter  neglect. 

Not  that  absolute  perfection  is  claimed  for  our 
common  English  Bible.  But  this  blessed  book 
is  so  far  complete  and  exact,  that  the  unlearned 
reader,  being  of  ordinary  intelligence,  may  enjoy 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


65 


the  delightful  assurance,  that,  if  he  study  it  in 
faith  and  prayer,  and  give  himself  up  to  its  teach¬ 
ings,  he  shall  not  be  confounded  or  misled  as  to 
any  matter  essential  to  his  salvation  and  his  spi¬ 
ritual  good.  It  will  as  safely  guide  him  into  all 
the  things  needful  for  faith  and  practice,  as 
would  the  original  Scriptures,  if  he  could  read 
them,  or  if  they  could  speak  to  him  as  erst  they 
spake  to  the  Hebrew  in  Jerusalem,  or  to  the 
Greek  in  Corinth.  Nor  is  this  any  disparage¬ 
ment  of  the  benefits  of  a  critical  knowledge  of 
the  original  tongues.  For  while  a  good  transla¬ 
tion  is  the  best  commentary  on  the  original 
Scriptures,  the  originals  themselves  are  the  best 
commentary  on  the  translation.  Passages  some¬ 
what  obscure  in  the  translation  often  become 
very  plain  when  we  recur  to  the  original,  because 
we  then  distinctly  see  what  it  was  that  the  trans¬ 
lators  meant  to  say.*  To  one  who  can  readily 

*  Take  an  instance  from  Isai.  v.  18.  “Woe  unto  them  that 
draw  iniquity  with  cords  of  vanity,  and  sin  as  it  were  with  a 
cart-rope."  From  the  last  member  of  this  parallelism  has  arisen 
the  absurd  proverb  for  a  high-handed  transgressor, — “  He  sinned 
with  a  cart-rope  !’’  On  recurring  to  the  Hebrew,  we  find  that 
“  sin"  is  not  a  verb  but  a  noun,  standing  in  apposition  with 
“  draw,"  as  iniquity  does  in  the  preceding  clause.  So  that 
the  ful'l  expression  of  the  last  clause  would  be, — “  and  that  draw 
sin  as  it  were  with  a  cart-rope," — thus  drudging  in  the  harness 
of  sin. 


6(3 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


understand  both,  the  original  must,  in  the  nature 
of  the  case,  always  be  the  easier  of  the  two  ;  just 
as  it  is  easier  for  a  man  to  walk  by  the  sight  of 
his  own  eyes,  than  by  the  guidance  of  another 
man’s  eyes.  It  is  only  maintained,  that  the  com¬ 
mon  English  reader  enjoys,  by  the  good  provi¬ 
dence  of  God,  that  which  comes  the  nearest  to 
the  privilege  of  the  classical  scholar;  and  has  a 
translation  so  exact,  plain,  and  trustworthy,  that 
he  may  follow  it  with  implicit  confidence  as  “  a 
light  to  his  feet  and  a  lamp  to  his  paths.” 

The  King  was  for  appointing  fifty-four  learned 
men  to  this  great  and  good  work  ;  but  the  num¬ 
ber  actually  employed  upon  it,  in  the  first  in¬ 
stance,  was  forty-seven.  Order  was  also  taken, 
that  the  bishops,  in  their  several  dioceses,  should 
find  what  men  of  learning  there  were,  who  might 
be  able  to  assist  ;  and  the  bishops  were  to  write 
to  them,  earnestly  charging  them,  at  the  king’s 
desire,  to  send  in  their  suggestions  and  critical 
observations,  that  so,  as  his  Majesty  remarks, 
“  our  said  intended  translation  may  have  the  help 
and  furtherance  of  all  our  principal  learned  men 
within  this  our  kingdom.” 

Seventeen  of  the  translators  were  to  work  at 
Westminster,  fifteen  at  Cambridge,  and  as  many 
at  Oxford.  Those  who  met  at  each  place  were 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE.  67 

divided  into  two  companies  ;  so  that  there  were, 
in  all,  six  distinct  companies  of  translators.  They 
received  a  set  of  rules  for  their  direction.  The 
first  instructed  them  to  make  the  “  Bishop’s  Bi¬ 
ble,”  so  called,  the  basis  of  their  work,  altering 
it  no  further  than  fidelity  to  the  originals  required. 
In  the  result,  however,  the  new  version  agreed 
much  more  with  the  Geneva  than  with  any  other  ; 
though  the  huffing  king,  at  the  Hampton  Court 
Conference,  reproached  it  as  “  the  worst  of  all.” 
The  second  rule  requires  that  the  mode  then  used 
of  spelling  the  proper  names  should  be  retained 
as  far  as  might  be.  The  third  rule  requires  “the 
old  ecclesiastical  words  to  be  kept,”  such  as 
“church”  instead  of  “  congregation.”  The  fourth 
rule  prescribes,  that  where  a  word  has  different 
meanings,  that  is  to  be  preferred  which  has  the 
general  sanction  of  the  most  ancient  Fathers, 
regard  being  had  to  “  the  propriety  of  the  place, 
and  the  analogy  of  faith.”  The  fifth  rule  directs 
that  the  divisions  into  chapters  be  altered  as  little 
as  may  be.  The  sixth  rule,  agreeably  to  Dr. 
Reynolds’s  wise  suggestion  at  Hampton  Court, 
prohibits  all  notes  or  comments,  thus  obliging  the 
translators  to  make  their  version  intelligible  with¬ 
out  those  dangerous  helps.  The  seventh  rule  pro¬ 
vides  for  marginal  references  to  parallel  or  ex- 


68 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


planatory  passages.  The  eighth  rule  enjoins  that 
each  man  in  each  company  shall  separately  exam¬ 
ine  the  same  chapter  or  chapters,  and  put  the 
translation  into  the  best  shape  he  can.  The  whole 
company  must  then  come  together,  and  compare 
what  they  have  done,  and  agree  on  what  shall 
stand.  Thus  in  each  company,  according  to  the 
number  of  members,  there  would  be  from  seven 
to  ten  distinct  and  carefully  labored  revisions, 
the  whole  to  be  compared,  and  digested  into  one 
copy  of  the  portion  of  the  Bible  assigned  to  each 
particular  company.  The  ninth  rule  directs,  that 
as  fast  as  any  company  shall,  in  this  manner,  com¬ 
plete  any  one  of  the  sacred  books,  it  is  to  be  sent 
to  each  of  the  other  companies,  to  be  critically 
reviewed  by  them  all.  The  tenth  rule  prescribes, 
that  if  any  company,  upon  reviewing  a  book  so 
sent  to  them,  find  any  thing  doubtful  or  unsatis¬ 
factory,  they  are  to  note  the  places,  and  their 
reasons  for  objecting  thereto,  and  send  it  back  to 
the  company  from  whence  it  came.  If  that  com¬ 
pany  should  not  concur  in  the  suggestions  thus 
made,  the  matter  was  to  be  finally  arranged  at  a 
general  meeting  of  the  chief  persons  of  all  the 
companies  at  the  end  of  the  work.  Thus  every 
part  of  the  Bible  would  be  fully  considered,  first, 
separately,  by  each  member  of  the  company  to 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


69 


which  it  was  originally  assigned  ;  secondly,  by 
that  whole  company  in  concert  ;  thirdly,  by  the 
other  five  companies  severally  ;  and  fourthly,  by 
the  general  committee  of  revision.  By  this  ju¬ 
dicious  plan,  each  part  must  have  been  closely 
scrutinized  at  least  fourteen  times.  The  eleventh 
rule  provides,  that  in  case  of  any  special  difficulty 
or  obscurity,  letters  shall  be  issued  by  authority 
to  any  learned  man  in  the  land,  calling  for  his 
judgment  thereon.  The  twelfth  rule  requires 
every  bishop  to  notify  the  clergy  of  his  diocese 
as  to  the  work  in  hand,  and  to  “  move  and  charge 
as  many  as,  being  skilful  in  the  tongues,  have 
taken  pains  in  that  kind,  to  send  his  particular 
observations  ”  to  some  one  of  the  companies. 
The  thirteenth  rule  appoints  the  directors  of  the 
different  companies.  The  fourteenth  rule  names 
five  other  translations  to  be  used,  “  when  they 
agree  better  with  the  text  than  the  Bishop’s  Bi¬ 
ble.”  These  are  Tyndale’s  ; — Matthew’s,  which 
is  by  Tyndale  and  John  Rogers  ; — Coverdale’s  ; 
— Whitchurch’s,  which  is  “  Cranmer’s,”  or  the 
“  Great  Bible,”  and  wTas  printed  by  Whitchurch  ; 
— and  the  Geneva  Bible.  The  object  of  this  regu¬ 
lation  was  to  avoid,  as  far  as  possible,  the  suspi¬ 
cious  stamp  of  novelty.  To  the  careful  observ 
ance  of  these  injunctions,  wrhich,  with  the  excep 


70 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


lion  of  the  first  five,  are  highly  judicious,  is  to 
be  ascribed  much  of  the  excellence  of  the  com¬ 
pleted  translation. 

To  these  rules,  which  were  delivered  to  the 
Translators,  there  appears  to  have  been  added 
another,  providing  that,  besides  the  directors  of 
the  six  companies,  “  three  or  four  of  the  most 
ancient  and  grave  divines  in  either  of  the  Univer¬ 
sities,  not  employed  in  translating,”  be  designated 
by  the  Vice-Chancellors  and  Heads  of  Colleges, 
“  to  be  overseers  of  the  Translation,  as  well  He¬ 
brew  as  Greek,  for  the  better  observation  of  the 
fourth  rule.” 

The  learned  Selden  says,  that  when  the  Trans¬ 
lators  met  to  compare  what  they  had  done,  each 
of  them  held .  in  his  hand  a  Bible  in  some  lan¬ 
guage.  If  any  thing  struck  any  one  as  requiring 
alteration,  he  spoke  ;  otherwise  the  reading  went 
on.  The  final  revision  was  made,  not  by  six 
men,  as  the  tenth  of  the  above  rules  would  seem 
to  indicate,  but  by  twelve.  At  least,  such  was 
the  statement  made  in  the  Synod  of  Dort  in  1618, 
by  Dr.  Samuel  Ward,  who  was  one  of  the  most 
active  of  the  Translators.  It  seems  to  have  been 
carried  through  the  press  by  Dr.  Miles  Smith  and 
Bishop  Bilson,  aided  perhaps  by  Archbishop  Ban¬ 
croft  and  other  prelates.  All  the  expense  of 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE- 


71 


making  and  printing  the  translation  was  defrayed 
by  Robert  Barker,  “Printer  to  the  King’s  most 
Excellent  Maiestie.”  The  copy-right  thus  cost 
him  three  thousand  five  hundred  pounds  ;  and  his 
heirs  and  assigns  retained  their  privilege  down  to 
the  year  1709.  For  two  hundred  and  forty  years 
and  more,  God  has  been  speaking  by  this  pre¬ 
cious  volume  to  the  multitudes  of  the  Anglo- 
Saxon  race.  Popery,  apparently  believing  that 
ignorance  is  the  mother  of  devotion,  and  espe¬ 
cially  ignorance  of  the  Word  of  God,  would  fain 
have  supplanted  it  by  priestly  inventions  and 
monkish  corruptions. 

“  But  to  outweigh  all  harm,  the  Sacred  Book, 

In  dusty  sequestration  wrapt  too  long, 

Assumes  the  accents  of  our  native  tongue ; 

And  he  who  guides  the  plow,  or  wields  the  crook, 

"With  understanding  spirit  now  may  look 
Upon  her  records,  listen  to  her  song, 

And  sift  her  laws, — -much  wondering  that  the  wrong, 
Which  faith  has  suffered,  Heaven  could  calmly  brook, 
Transcendant  boon  !  noblest  that  earthly  king 
Ever  bestowed  to  equalize  and  bless 
Under  the  weight  of  mortal  wretchedness.” 

The  printing  of  the  English  Bible  has  proved 
to  be  by  far  the  mightiest  barrier  ever  reared  to 
repel  the  advance  of  Popery,  and  to  damage  all 
the  resources  of  the  Papacy.  Originally  intend 


72 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


ed  for  the  five  or  six  millions  who  dwelt  within 
the  narrow  limits  of  the  British  Islands,  it  at  once 
formed  and  fixed  their  language,  till  then  unset¬ 
tled  ;  and  has  since  gone  with  that  language  to 
the  isles  and  shores  of  every  sea.  “  And  now, 
during  the  lapse  of  almost  two  and  a  half  centu¬ 
ries,  it  has  gladdened  the  hearts,  and  still  glad¬ 
dens  the  hearts  of  millions  upon  millions,  not 
only  in  Great  Britain,  but  throughout  North 
America  and  the  Indies,  in  portions  of  Africa, 
and  in  Australia.  At  the  present  day,  the  Eng¬ 
lish  is  probably  the  vernacular  tongue  of  more 
millions  than  of  any  other  one  language  under 
heaven  ;  and  the  English  Bible  has  brought  and 
still  brings  home  the  knowledge  of  God’s  revealed 
truth  to  myriads  more  of  minds  than  ever  re¬ 
ceived  it  through  the  original  tongues.  The 
Translators  little  foresaw  the  vast  results  and 
immeasurable  influence  of  what  they  had  thus 
done,  both  for  time  and  for  eternity.  Venerated 
men  !  their  very  names  are  now  hardly  known  to 
more  than  a  few  persons  ;  yet,  in  the  providence 
of  God,  the  fruits  of  their  labors  have  spread  to 
far  distant  climes  ;  have  laid  broad  and  deep  the 
foundations  of  mighty  empires  ;  have  afforded  to 
multitudes  strength  to  endure  adversity,  and 
grace  to  resist  the  temptations  of  prosperity  ; 


INTRODUCTORY  NARRATIVE. 


73 


and  only  the  revelations  of  the  judgment-day  can 
disclose  how  many  millions  and  millions,  through 
the  instrumentality  of  their  labors,  have  been 
made  wise  unto  salvation.* 

Surely  it  is  time,  that  the  names  of  these 
“  venerated  men”  were  rescued  from  such  unjust 
oblivion  ;  and  that  at  least  some  considerable 
part  of  those  who  have  received  such  incalcula¬ 
ble  benefits  at  their  hands,  should  know  to  whom 
they  are  so  deeply  indebted.  The  sensation  of 
gratitude  is  one  of  pleasure  ;  and  it  is  hoped  that 
this  little  book  may  serve  to  awaken  it  in  many 
a  bosom,  both  toward  the  men  wrho  wrought  so 
good  a  work,  “  and  made  all  coming  ages  their 
own,” — and  toward  Him  who  gave  them  their 
skill,  and  the  opportunity  to  exert  it  in  thus  wide¬ 
ly  diffusing  his  saving  truth. 


*  Report  of  the  Committee  on  Versions,  made  to  the  Board  of 
Managers  of  the  American  Bible  Society,  and  adopted  May  1st, 


1851. 


'>  . .  4  A 


,* 


t.  *: 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


V. 

« 


Having  thus  traced  the  history  of  our  Common 
Version,  through  the  successive  steps  by  which  it 
nas  come  dowTn  to  us  in  its  present  shape,  it  re¬ 
mains  for  us  to  inquire  as  to  the  persons  who 
put  the  finishing  hand  to  the  work,  and  to  satisfy 
ourselves  as  to  their  qualifications  for  the  task. 
It  is  obvious  that  this  personal  investigation  is  of 
the  utmost  importance  in  settling  the  degree  of 
confidence  to  which  their  labors  are  entitled. 
Unless  it  can  be  proved  that  they  were,  as  a 
body,  eminently  fitted  to  do  this  work  as  it  ought 
to  be  done,  it  can  have  no  claim  to  be  regarded 
as  a  “finality”  in  the  matter  of  furnishing  a 
translation  of  the  Word  of  God  for  the  English 
speaking  populations  of  the  globe. 


76 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


It  is  exceedingly  strange  that  a  question  of 
such  obvious  importance  has  been  so  long  left 
almost  unnoticed.  Numerous  histories  of  the 
Translation  itself  have  been  drawn  up  with  great 
labor;  but  no  man  seems  to  have  thought  it 
worth  his  while  to  give  any  account  of  the 
Translators,  except  the  most  meagre  notices  of  a 
few  of  them,  and  general  attestations  to  their  rep¬ 
utations,  in  their  own  time,  for  such  scholarship 
and  skill  as  their  undertaking  required.  Even 
the  late  excellent  Christopher  Anderson,  in  his 
huge  volumes,  replete  as  they  are  with  research 
and  information  upon  the  minutest  points  relating 
to  his  subject,  allots  but  a  page  or  two  of  his 
smallest  type  to  this  essential  branch  of  it. 

It  is  nearly  twenty  years  since  the  writer  of 
these  pages  began  to  consider  the  desirableness 
of  knowing  more  of  those  eminent  divines,  and 
he  has  ever  since  pursued  a  zealous  search 
wherever  he  was  likely  to  effect  any  “  restitution 
of  decayed  intelligence”  respecting  them.  At 
first,  he  almost  despaired  of  ascertaining  much 
more  than  the  bare  names  of  most  of  them.  But 
by  degrees  he  has  collected  innumerable  scraps 
of  information,  gathered  from  a  great  variety  of 
sources  ;  amply  sufficient,  with  due  arrangement* 
to  illustrate  the  subject.  His  object  is  simply  to 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


77 


shew,  that  the  Translators  commissioned  by 
James  Stuart  were  ripe  and  critical  scholars,  pro¬ 
foundly  versed  in  all  the  learning1  required  ;  and 
that,  in  these  particulars,  there  has  never  yet 
been  a  time  when  a  better  qualified  company 
could #have  been  collected  for  the  purpose. 

Of  the  forty-seven,  who  acted  under  king 
James’s  commission,  some  are  almost  unknown 
at  this  day,  though  of  high  repute  in  their  own 
time.  A  few  have  left  us  but  little  more  than 
their  names,  worthy  of  immortal  remembrance, 
were  it  only  for  their  connection  with  this  noble 
monument  of  learning  and  piety.  But  their 
being  associated  with  so  many  other  scholars  and 
divines  of  the  greatest  eminence,  is  proof  that 
they  were  deemed  to  be  fit  companions  for  the 
brightest  lights  of  the  land.  This  is  confirmed 
by  the  fact  that,  though  the  king  designed  to 
employ  in  this  work  the  highest  and  ripest  talents 
in  his  realm,  there  were  still  many  men  in  Eng¬ 
land  distinguished  for  their  learning,  like  Brough¬ 
ton  and  Bedell,  who  were  not  enrolled  on  the 
list  of  translators.  It  is  but  just  to  conclude, 
therefore,  that  even  such  as  are  now  less  known 
to  us,  were  then  accounted  to  deserve  a  place 
with  the  best.  What  we  may  know  of  the 
greater  part  of  them,  must  lead  to  the  highest 


78 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


estimate  of  the  whole  body  of  these  good  men. 
The  catalogue  begins  with  one  whose  name  is 
worthy  of  the  place  it  fills. 


LANCELOT  ANDREWS. 

He  was  born  at  London,  in  1565.  He  was 
trained  chiefly  at  Merchant  Taylor’s  school,  in 
his  native  city,  till  he  was  appointed  to  one  of 
the  first  Greek  Scholarships  of  Pembroke  Hall, 
in  the  University  of  Cambridge.  Once  a  year, 
at  Easter,  he  used  to  pass  a  month  with  his  pa¬ 
rents.  During  this  vacation ,  he  would  find  a 
master,  from  whom  he  learned  some  language 
to  which  he  was  before  a  stranger.  In  this 
way  after  a  few  years,  he  acquired  most  of  the 
modern  languages  of  Europe.  At  the  Univer¬ 
sity,  he  gave  himself  chiefly  to  the  Oriental 
tongues  and  to  divinity.  When  he  became 
candidate  for  a  fellowship,  there  was  but  one 
vacancy  ;  and  he  had  a  powerful  competitor  in 
Dr.  Dove,  who  was  afterwards  Bishop  of  Peter¬ 
borough.  After  long  and  severe  examination, 
the  matter  was  decided  in  favor  of  Andrews. 
But  Dove,  though  vanquished,  proved  himself 


LANCELOT  ANDREWS. 


79 


in  this  trial  so  fine  a  scholar,  that  the  College, 
unwilling  to  lose  him,  appointed  him  as  a  sort 
of  supernumerary  Fellow.  Andrews  also  re¬ 
ceived  a  complimentary  appointment  as  Fellow 
of  Jesus  College,  in  the  University  of  Oxford.  In 
his  own  College,  he  wTas  made  a  catechist  ;  that 
is  to  say,  a  lecturer  in  divinity. 

His  conspicuous  talents  soon  gained  him  power¬ 
ful  patrons.  Henry,  Earl  of  Huntingdon,  took  him 
into  the  North  of  England  ;  where  he  was  the 
means  of  converting  many  papists  by  his  preach¬ 
ing  and  disputations.  He  was  also  warmly  be¬ 
friended  by  Sir  Francis  Walsingham,  Secretary 
of  State  to  Queen  Elizabeth.  He  was  made 
parson  of  Alton,  in  Hampshire  ;  and  then  Vicar 
of  St.  Giles,  in  London.  He  was  afterwards 
made  Prebendary  and  Canon  Residentiary  of  St. 
Paul’s,  and  also  of  the  Collegiate  Church  of 
Southwark.  He  lectured  on  divinity  at  St. 
Paul’s  three  times  each  week.  On  the  death  of 
Dr.  Fulke,  in  1589,  Dr.  Andrews,  though  so 
young,  wTas  chosen  Master  of  Pembroke  Hall, 
where  he  had  received  his  education.  While  at 
the  head  of  this  College,  he  wTas  one  of  its 
principal  benefactors.  It  was  rather  poor  at 
that  time,  but  by  his  efforts  its  endowments 
were  much  increased  ;  and  at  his  death,  many 


80 


THE  TRANSLATORS'  REVIVED. 


years  later,  he  bequeathed  to  it,  besides  some 
plate,  three  hundred  folio  volumes,  and  a  thou¬ 
sand  pounds  to  found  two  fellowships. 

He  gave  up  his  Mastership  to  become  chap¬ 
lain  in  ordinary  to  Queen  Elizabeth,  who  de¬ 
lighted  in  his  preaching,  and  made  him  Preben¬ 
dary  of  Westminster,  and  afterwards  Dean  of 
that  famous  church.  In  the  matter  of  Church 
dignities  and  preferments,  he  was  highly  favor¬ 
ed.  It  was  while  he  held  the  office  of  Dean  of 
Westminster,  that  Dr.  Andrews  wras  made  direc¬ 
tor,  or  president,  of  the  first  company  of  Trans¬ 
lators,  composed  of  ten  members,  who  held  their 
meetings  at  Westminster.  The  portion  assigned 
to  them  was  the  five  books  of  Moses,  and  the  his¬ 
torical  books  to  the  end  of  the  Second  Book  of 
Kings.  Perhaps  no  part  of  the  work  is  better 
executed  than  this. 

With  King  James,  Dr.  Andrews  stood  in  still 
higher  favor  than  he  had  done  with  Elizabeth. 
The  “  royal  pedant  ”  had  published  a  .  “  Defence 
of  the  Rights  of  Kings,”  in  opposition  to  the  arro¬ 
gant  claims  of  the  Popes.  He  was  answered 
most  bitterly  by  the  celebrated  Cardinal  Bellar- 

0 

mine.  The  King  set  Dr.  Andrews  to  refute  the 
Cardinal  ;  which  he  did  in  a  learned  and  spirited 
quarto,  highly  commended  by  Casaubon.  To 


LANCELOT  ANDREWS. 


81 


that  quarto,  the  Cardinal  made  no  reply.  For 
this  service,  the  King  rewarded  his  champion,  by 
.  making  him  Bishop  of  Chichester  ;  to  which 
office  Dr.  Andrews  was  consecrated,  November 
3d,  1605.  This  was  soon  after  his  appointment 
to  be  one  of  the  Translators  of  the  Bible.  He 
accepted  the  bishopric  with  great  humility,  having 
already  refused  that  dignity  more  than  once. 
The  motto  graven  on  his  episcopal  seal  was  the 
solemn  exclamation, — “  And  who  is  sufficient  for 
these  things  !”  At  this  time  he  was  also  made 
Lord  Almoner  to  the  King,  a  place  of  great  trust, 
in  which  he  proved  himself  faithful  and  uncorrupt. 
In  September,  1609,  he  was  transferred  to  the 
bishopric  of  Ely  ;  and  was  called  to  his  Majes¬ 
ty’s  privy  council.  In  February,  1618,  he  was 
translated  to  the  bishopric  of  Winchester  ;  which 
if  less  dignified  than  the  archiepiscopal  see  of 
Canterbury,  was  then  much  more  richly  endow¬ 
ed  ;  so  that  it  used  to  be  said, — “  Canterbury  is 
the  higher  rack,  but  Winchester  is  the  better 
manger.”  At  t-he  time  of  this  last  preferment 
Dr.  Andrews  was  appointed  Dean  of  the  King’s  cha- 

1 

pel ;  and  these  stations  he  retained  till  his  death. 

In  the  high  offices  Bishop  Andrews  filled,  he 
conducted  himself  with  great  ability  and  integ¬ 
rity.  The  crack-brained  king,  who  scarce  knew 


82 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


now  to  restrain  his  profaneness  and  levity  under 
the  most  serious  circumstances,  was  overawed 
by  the  gravity  of  this  prelate,  and  desisted  from 
mirth  and  frivolity  in  his  presence.  And  yet  the 
good  bishop  knew  how  to  be  facetious  on  occa¬ 
sion.  Edmund  Waller,  the  poet,  tells  of  being 
once  at  court,  and  overhearing  a  conversation 
held  by  the  king  with  Bishop  Andrews,  and 
Bishop  Neile,  of  Durham.  The  monarch,  who 
was  always  a  jealous  stickler  for  his  prerogatives, 
and  something  more,  was  in  those  days  trying  to 
raise  a  revenue  without  parliamentary  authority. 
In  these  measures,  so  clearly  unconstitutional,  he 
was  opposed  by  Bishop  Andrews  with  dignity  and 
decision.  Waller  says,  the  king  asked  this  brace 
of  bishops, — “  My  lords,  cannot  I  take  my  sub¬ 
ject’s  money  when  I  want  it,  without  all  this  for¬ 
mality  in  parliament  ?”  The  Bishop  of  Durham, 
one  of  the  meanest  of  sycophants  to  his  prince, 
and  a  harsh  and  haughty  oppressor  of  his  puritan 
clergy,  made  ready  answer, — “  God  forbid,  Sir, 
but  you  should  ;  you  are  the  breath  of  our  nos¬ 
trils  !”  Upon  this  the  king  looked  at  the  Bishop 
of  Winchester, — “  Well,  my  lord,  what  say  you  ?” 
Dr.  Andrews  replied  evasively, — “  Sir,  I  have  no 
skill  to  .judge  of  parliamentary  matters.”  But 
the  king  persisted, — “  No  put  offs,  my  lord  !  an- 


LANCELOT  ANDREWS. 


83 


swer  me  presently.”  “  Then,  Sir,”  said  the 
shrewd  Bishop,  “  I  think  it  lawful  for  you  to 
take  my  brother  Neile’s  money,  for  he  offers  it.” 
Even  the  petulant  king  was  hugely  pleased 
with  this  piece  of  pleasantry,  which  gave  great 
amusement  to  his  cringing-  courtiers. 

o  O 

“  For  the  benefit  of  the  afflicted,”  as  the  ad¬ 
vertisements  have  it,  we  give  a  little  incident 
which  may  afford  a  useful  hint  to  some  that  need 
it.  While  Dr.  Andrews  was  one  of  the  divines 
at  Cambridge,  he  was  applied  to  by  a  worthy 
alderman  of  that  drow’sy  city,  who  was  beset  by 
the  sorry  habit  of  sleeping  under  the  afternoon 
sermon  ;  and  who,  to  his  great  mortification,  had 
been  publicly  rebuked  by  the  minister  of  the  par¬ 
ish.  As  snuff  had  not  then  came  into  vogue,  Dr. 
Andrews  did  not  advise,  as  some  matter-of-fact 
persons  have  done  in  such  cases,  to  titillate  the 
“  sneezer  ”  with  a  rousing  pinch.  He  seems  to 
have  been  of  the  opinion  of  the  famous  Dr.  Ro- 
maine,  who  once  told  his  full-fed  congregation  in 
London,  that  it  was  hard  work  to  preach  to  two 
pounds  of  beef  and  a  pot  of  porter.  So‘Dr.  An¬ 
drews  advised  his  civic  friend  to  help  his  wake¬ 
fulness  by  dining  very  sparingly.  The  advice 
was  followed  ;  but  without  avail.  Again  the  ro¬ 
tund  dignitary  slumbered  and  slept  in  his  pew  ; 


84 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


and  again  was  he  roused  by  the  harsh  rebukes  of 
the  irritated  preacher.  With  tears  in  those  too 
sleepy  eyes  of  his,  the  mortified  alderman  re¬ 
paired  to  Dr.  Andrews,  begging  for  further  coun¬ 
sel.  The  considerate  divine,  pitying  his  infirmity, 
recommended  to  him  to  dine  as  usual,  and  then 
to  take  his  nap  before  repairing  to  his  pew. 
This  plan  was  adopted ;  and  to  the  next  dis¬ 
course,  which  was  a  violent  invective  prepared 
for  the  very  purpose  of  castigating  the  alder¬ 
man’s  somnolent  habit,  he  listened  with  unwink 
ing  eyes,  and  his  uncommon  vigilance  gave  quite 
a  ridiculous  air  to  the  whole  business.  The  un¬ 
happy  parson  was  nearly  as  much  vexed  at  his 
huge-waisted  parishioner’s  unwonted  wakeful¬ 
ness,  as  before  at  his  unseemly  dozing. 

Bishop  Andrews  continued  in  high  esteem 
with  Charles  I.  ;  and  that  most  culpable  of  mon- 
archs,  whose  only  redeeming  quality  was  the 
strength  and  tenderness  of  his  domestic  affec¬ 
tions,  in  his  dying  advice  to  his  children,  advised 
them  to  study  the  writings  of  three  divines,  of 
whom  our  Translator  was  one. 

Lancelot  Andrews  died  at  Winchester  House, 
in  Southwark,  London,  September  25th,  1626, 
aged  sixty-one  years.  He  was  buried  in  the 
Church  of  St.  Saviour,  where  a  fair  monument 


LANCELOT  ANDREWS. 


85 


marks  the  spot.  Having  never  married,  he  be¬ 
queathed  his  property  to  benevolent  uses.  John 
Milton,  then  but  a  youth,  wrote  a  glowing  Latin 
elegy  on  his  death. 

As  a  preacher,  Bishop  Andrews  was  right 

famous  in  his  day.  He  was  called  the  “  star  of 

* 

preachers.”  Thomas  Fuller  says  that  he  was  “an 
inimitable  preacher  in  his  way  ;  and  such  pla¬ 
giarists  as  have  stolen  his  sermons  could  never 
steal  his  preaching,  and  could  make  nothing  of 
that,  whereof  he  made  all  things  as  he  desired.” 
Pious  and  pleasant  Bishop  Felton,  his  contempo¬ 
rary  and  colleague,  endeavored  in  vain  in  his 
sermons  to  assimilate  to  his  style,  and  therefore 
said  merrily  of  himself, — “  I  had  almost  marred 
my  own  natural  trot  by  endeavoring  to  imitate 
his  artificial  amble.”  Let  this  be  a  warning  to 
all  who  would  fain  play  the  monkey,  and  espe¬ 
cially  to  such  as  would  ape  the  eccentricities  of 
genius.  Nor  is  it  desirable  that  Bishop  Andrews’ 
style  shonld  be  imitated  even  successfully  ;  for  it 
abounds  in  quips,  quirks,  and  puns,  according  to 
the  false  taste  of  his  time.  Few  writers  are  “  so 
happy  as  to  treat  on  matters  which  must  always 
interest,  and  to  do  it  in  a  manner  which  shall  for 
ever  please.”  To  build  up  a  solid  literary  repu¬ 
tation,  taste  and  judgment  in  composition  are  as 


86 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


necessary  as  learning  and  strength  of  thought. 
The  once  admired  folios  of  Bishop  Andrews  have 
Jong  been  doomed  to  the  dusty  dignity  of  the 
lower  shelf  in  the  library. 

Many  hours  he  spent  each  day  in  private  and 
family  devotions ;  and  there  were  some  who  used 
to  desire  that  “  they  might  end  their  days  in 
Bishop  Andrews’s  chapel.”  He  was  one  in 
whom  was  proved  the  truth  of  Luther’s  saying, 
that  “  to  have  prayed  well,  is  to  have  studied 

well.”  His  manual  for  his  private  devotions,  pre- 

0 

pared  by  himself,  is  wholly  in  the  Greek  lan¬ 
guage.  It  has  been  translated  and  printed. 
This  praying  prelate  also  abounded  in  alms-giv¬ 
ing  ;  usually  sending  his  benefactions  in  private, 
as  from  a  friend  who  chose  to  remain  unknown. 
He  was  exceedingly  liberal  in  his  gifts  to  poor 
and  deserving  scholars.  His  own  instructors  he 
held  in  the  Highest  reverence.  His  old  school¬ 
master  Mulcaster  always  sat  at  the  upper  end  of 
the  episcopal  table  ;  and  when  the  venerable  ped¬ 
agogue  was  dead,  his  portrait  was  placed  over  the 
bishop’s  study  door.  These  were  just  tokens  of 
respect  ; 

“  For  if  the  scholar  to  such  height  did  reach, 

Then  what  was  he  who  did  that  scholar  teach  r>” 


LANCELOT  ANDREWS. 


87 


This  worthy  diocesan  was  much  “  given  to 
hospitality,”  and  especially  to  literary  strangers. 
So  bountiful  was  his  cheer,  that  it  used  to  be 
said, — “  My  lord  of  Winchester  keeps  Christmas 
all  the  year  round.”  He  once  spent  three  thou¬ 
sand  pounds  in  three  days,  though  “  in  this  we 
praise  him  not,”  in  entertaining  King  James  at 
Farnham  Castle.  His  society  was  as  much 
sought,  however,  for  the  charm  of  his  rich  and 
instructive  conversation,  as  for  his  liberal  house¬ 
keeping  and  his  exalted  stations. 

But  we  are  chiefly  concerned  to  know  what 
were  his  qualifications  as  a  Translator  of  the  Bi¬ 
ble.  He  ever  bore  the  character  of  “  a  right 
godly  man,”  and  “  a  prodigious  student.”  One 
competent  judge  speaks  of  him  as  “  that  great 
gulf  of  learning  !”  It  was  also  said,  that  “  the 
world  wanted  learning  to  know  how  learned  this 
man  was.”  And  a  brave  old  chronicler  remarks, 
that,  such  was  his  skill  in  all  languages,  espe¬ 
cially  the  Oriental,  that,  had  he  been  present  at 
the  confusion  of  tongues  at  Babel,  he  might  have 
served  as  Interpreter- General !  In  his  funeral 
sermon  by  Dr.  Buckeridge,  Bishop  of  Rochester, 
it  is  said  that  Dr.  Andrews  was  conversant  with 
fifteen  languages. 


88 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


JOHN  OVERALL. 

This  divine  is  the  next  on  the  list  of  those 
good  men,  of  whom  the  marginal  comment  in 
the  Popish  translation  says, — “  They  will  be  ab¬ 
horred  in  the  depths  of  hell  !”  They  may  be 
abhorred  there ,  bnt,  after  a  while  no  where  else. 
He  was  born  in  1559,  at  Hadley,  and  was  bred 
in  the  free  school  at  that  place.  He  lived  through 
the  whole  of  that  happy  period,  which  many, 
beside  the  bard  of  Rydal  Mount,  regard  as  the 
best  days  of  old  England, 

“  When  faith  and  hope  were  in  their  prime, 

Li  great  Eliza’s  golden  time.” 

In  due  season,  he  was  entered  as  a  scholar  at 
St.  John’s  College,  Cambridge.  He  was  next 
chosen  Fellow  of  Trinity  College,  in  the  same 
University.  In  1596,  he  was  made  King’s  Pro¬ 
fessor  of  Divinity  ;  and  at  the  same  time  took  his 
doctor’s  degree,  being  about  thirty-seven  years 
of  age.  It  is  noted  of  this  eminent  theologian  by 
Bishop  Hacket,  that  it  was  his  custom  to  ground 
his  theses  in  the  schools  on  two  or  three  texts  of 
Scripture,  shewing  what  latitude  of  opinion  or 
interpretation  was  admissible  upon  the  point  in 


JOHN  OVERALL. 


89 


hand.  He  was  celebrated  for  the  appropriate¬ 
ness  of  his  quotations  from  the  Fathers.  He  was 
soon  after  made  Master  of  Catharine  Hall  very 
much  against  his  will.  To  end  a  bitter  conten¬ 
tion  in  regard  to  two  rival  candidates,  he  was 
elected,  if  election  it  could  be  called,  uncler  the 
Queen's  absolute  mandate.  When  Archbishop 
Whitgift  wished  the  new  Master  “joy  of  his 
place,”  the  latter  replied  that  it  was  “  terminus 
diminuens  which  is  Latin  for  “  an  Irish  promo¬ 
tion,”  or  a  “  hoist  down  hill.”  But  his  Grace,  in 
the  true  spirit  of  a  courtier  “  all  of  the  olden 
time,”  told  the  dissatisfied  Professor,  that  “  if 
the  injuries,  much  more  the  less  courtesies,  of 
princes  must  be  thankfully  taken,  as  the  ushers 
to  make  way  for  greater  favors.”  These  appoint¬ 
ments  must  be  taken  as  full  proof  of  Dr.  Overall’s 
superior  scholarship  in  that  learned  age,  when 
such  preferments  were  only  won  by  dint  of  the 
severest  application  to  study. 

In  1601,  on  the  recommendation  of  Lord 
Brooke,  that  noble  friend  and  patron  of  men  of 
learning  and  genius,  Dr.  Overall  was  made  Dean 
of  St.  Paul’s,  in  London.  It  may  be  doubted 
whether  this  studious  recluse,  absorbed  in  deep 
studies,  shone  with  his  brightest  lustre  in  the 
pulpit.  “  Being  appointed,”  says  Thomas  Ful 


90 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


ler,  “  to  preach  before  the  Queen,  he  professed 
to  my  father,  who  was  most  intimate  with  him, 
that  he  had  spoken  Latin  so  long,  it  was  troubler 
some  to  him  to  speak  English  in  a  continued 
oration.” 

Soon  after  the  throne  wTas  filled  by  James  the 
First,  whom  that  accomplished  statesman,  the 
Duke  of  Sully,  called  “  the  most  learned  fool  in 
Europe,”  the  Convocation,  or  parliament  of  the 
clergy,  came  together.  Dr.  Overall  was  prolocu¬ 
tor,  or  speaker,  of  the  lower  house  of  Convoca¬ 
tion.  To  this  body  he  presented  a  volume  of 
canons,  the  only  book  from  his  pen  now  extant. 
Its  object  was  to  vindicate  the  divine  right  of 
government.  But  though  it  was  adopted  by  the 
Convocation,  the  King  prevented  the  publication 
of  the  book  at  that  time,  because  it  taught,  that 
when,  after  a  revolution  or  conquest,  a  new  gov¬ 
ernment  or  dynasty  was  firmly  established,  this 
also,  in  its  turn,  could  plead  for  itself  a  divine 
right,  and  could  claim  the  obedience  of  the  peo¬ 
ple  as  a  matter  of  duty  toward  God.  This  “  Con¬ 
vocation  Book,”  now  so  long  forgotten,  was  print¬ 
ed  many  years  after  the  death  of  “  King  Jamie;” 
and  obtained  some  historical  and  political  celeb¬ 
rity,  because  it  had  the  very  effect  which  was 
apprehended  by  the  monarch  who  suppressed  it. 


JOHN  OVERALL. 


91 


For  when  his  grandson,  James  the  Second,  was 
expelled  from  the  soil  and  throne  of  England, 
many  bishops  and  other  clergymen,  called  “  non¬ 
jurors,”  refused  through  conscientious  scruples, 
to  swear  allegiance  to  the  new  government  of 
William  and  Mary.  Bishop  Sherlock  and  many 
others,  who  at  first  declined  the  oath,  professed 
to  be  converted  from  that  error  by  the  reading 
of  Dr.  Overall's  book.  But  conversions  so  favor¬ 
able  to  thrift  are  apt  to  be  held  in  suspicion. 
Dr.  Overall  was  the  author  of  the  questions  and 
answers  relating  to  the  sacraments,  which  have 
been  much  admired,  by  the  ablest  judges  of  such 
matters,  and  which  were  subjoined  to  the  Cat¬ 
echism  of  the  Church  of  England,  in  the  first 
year  of  James  the  First. 

It  was  while  he  was  Dean  of  St.  Paul’s  Cathe¬ 
dral,  that  he  was  joined  in  the  commission,  the 
highest  of  his  honors,  for  translating  the  Bible. 
Though  long  familiarity  with  other  languages 
may  have  made  him  somew’hat  inapt  for  continu¬ 
ous  public  discourse  in  his  mother-tongue,  he  was 
thereby  the  better  fitted  to  discern  the  sense  of 
the  sacred  original.  He  was  styled  by  Cam¬ 
den  “  a  prodigious  learned  man  and  is  said  by 
Fuller  to  have  been  “of  a  strong  brain  to  improve 
his  great  reading.” 


92 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


John  Overall,  who  “  carried  superintendency  in 
his  surname,”  was  made  Bishop  of  Litchfield  and 
Coventry,  in  1614.  Four  years  later  he  was 
transferred  to  the  see  of  Norwich,  where,  in  a 
few  months,  he  died,  at  the  age  of  sixty  years. 
This  was  in  1619.  He  frequently  had  in  his 
mouth  the  wTords  of  the  Psalmist, — “  When  thou 
with  rebukes  dost  correct  man  for  iniquity,  thou 
makest  his  beauty  to  consume  away  like  a  moth  ; 
surely  every  man  is  vanity.” 

In  his  later  years,  he  was  unhappily  inclined  to 
Arminianism.  He  was  a  correspondent  of  Vos- 
sius  and  Grotius,  and  other  famous  scholars  on 
the  continent.  He  was  greatly  addicted  to  the 
scholastic  theology,  now  so  much  decried.  Since 
the  days  of  Bacon  the  schoolmen  have  been  much 
depreciated,  because  there  was  so  little  practical 
fruit  of  their  studies.  And  yet  there  was  some¬ 
thing  wonderful  in  the  keenness  and  subtlety  of 
their  disputes  ;  though  it  is  lawful  to  smile  at  the 
excess  of  logical  refinement  which  subdivided 
the  stream  of  their  genius  into  a  ramification  of 
rills,  absorbed  at  last  in  the  dry  desert  of  meta¬ 
physics.  One  of  them  is  highly  praised  by  Car¬ 
dan,  “  for  that  only  one  of  his  arguments  was 
enough  to  puzzle  all  posterity  ;  and  that  when  he 
was  grown  old,  he  wept  because  he  could  not  un- 


HADRIAN  SARAVIA. 


93 


derstand  his  own  books.”  We  can  conceive,  how¬ 
ever,  that  the  refinement  of  the  schoolmen  as  to 
precise  definitions,  and  nicer  shades  of  thought, 
might  be  a  valuable  quality  in  some,  at  least,  ot 
the  company  of  Translators. 


HADRIAN  SARAVIA. 

*  This  noted  scholar  was  a  Belgian  by  birth. 
His  father  was  a  Spaniard,  his  mother  was  a 
Belgian,  and  both  were  Protestants.  He  was 
born  in  1530,  at  Hedin  in  Artois.  Of  his  early 
life  no  notices  have  reached  us.  He  was,  for 
some  years,  a  pastor  both  in  Flanders  and  Hol¬ 
land.  He  was,  in  his  principles,  a  terrible  high- 
church-man  ;  and  seems,  from  his  zeal  for  the 
divine  right  of  episcopacy,  to  have  had  some 
trouble  with  his  colleagues  and  the  magistrates 
at  Ghent,  where  he  was  one  of  the  ministers  in 
1566.  From  that  place  he  retired  to  England. 
He  was  sent  by  Queen  Elizabeth’s  Council  as  a 
sort  of  missionary  to  the  islands  of  Guernsey  and 
Jersey,  where  he  was  one  of  the  first  Protestant 


94 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


ministers  ;  knowing,  as  he  says  of  himself,  in  a 
letter,  “  which  were  the  beginnings,  and  by  what 
means  and  occasions  the  preaching  of  God’s 
word  was  planted  there.”  He  labored  there  in  a 
twofold  capacity,  doing  the  work  of  an  evange¬ 
list,  and  conducting  a  newly  established  school, 
called  Elizabeth  College. 

From  his  island-home,  he  was  recalled  to  the 
continent  by  the  Belgian  churches,  in  1577.  He 
was  invited  to  become  Professor  of  Divinity  at  the 
University  of  Leyden,  in  1582  ;  and  soon  after 
wTas  also  made  preacher  of  the  French  Church 
in  that  city.  In  1587  he  came  to  England  with 
the  Earl  of  Leicester,  and  became  master  of  the 
grammar-school  m  Southampton,  where,  in  the 
course  of  a  few  years,  he  trained  many  distin¬ 
guished  pupils. 

His  zeal  for  episcopacy  led  him  to  publish 
several  Latin  treatises  against  Beza,  Daneeus,  and 
other  Presbyterians.  He  also  published  a  trea¬ 
tise  on  papal  primacy  against  the  Jesuit  Gretser. 
All  his  publications  relate  to  such  matters,  and 
were  collected  into  a  folio  edition,  in  the  year 
.1611.  They  are  still  highly  praised  by  the  “Ox¬ 
ford  divines,”  who  have  given  occasion  to  Mac- 
auley  to  say,  in  his  caustic  style, — “  The  glory 
of  being  further  behind  the  age  than  any  other 


HADRIAN  SARAVIA. 


95 


class  of  the  British  people,  is  one  which  that 
learned  body  acquired  early,  and  has  never  lost.” 

In  1590,  Saravia  was  made  Doctor  of  Divinity 
at  Oxford,  as  had  been  done  long-  before  at  the 
University  of  Leyden.  He  was  made  Prebendary 
of  Gloucester,  next  of  Canterbury,  in  1695  ;  and 
then  of  Westminster  in  1601.  This  last  was  his 
highest  preferment.  He  added  to  it  the  rector¬ 
ship  of  Great  Chart,  in  Kent,  some  eight  years 
after.  He  died  at  Canterbury,  January  15th, 
1612,  aged  eighty-two  years.  Thus  his  fluctuat¬ 
ing  life  ended  in  a  quiet  old  age,  and  a  peaceful 
death. 

He  is  said,  by  Anthony  a-Wood,  to  have  been 
“  educated  in  all  kinds  of  literature  in  his  young¬ 
er  days,  especially  in  several  languages.”  It 
was  his  fortune  to  find  friends  and  patrons  among 
the  great.  Archbishop  Whitgift,  that  stern  sup¬ 
pressor  of  Puritanism,  held  him  in  high  esteem, 
and  made  great  use  of  his  aid  in  conducting  his 
share  m  the  controversies  of  the  time.  In  par¬ 
ticular  the  arch-prelate  relied  much  on  Dr.  Sa- 
ravia’s  “Hebrew  learning”  in  his  contests  with 
Hugh  Broughton,  that  stiff  Puritan,  whom  Light- 
foot  styles  “  the  great  Albionean  divine,  re¬ 
nowned  in  many  nations  for  rare  skill  in  Salem’s 
and  Athen’s  tongues,  and  familiar  acquaintance 


96 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


with  all  Rabbinical  learning.”  Thus  the  Preben¬ 
dary  of  Westminster  was  accustomed  to  cross 
swords  with  no  mean  adversaries  ;  and  was,  no 
doubt,  thoroughly  furnished  with  the  knowledge 
necessary  for  a  Bible  translator. 

While  Dr.  Saravia  was  Prebendary  of  Canter¬ 
bury,  the  famous  Richard.  Hooker  was  parson  of 
the  village  of  Borne,  about  three  miles  distant. 
Between  these  worthies  there  sprang  up  a  friend¬ 
ship,  cemented  by  the  agreement  of  their  views 
and  studies.  Professor  Keble  says,  that  Saravia 
was  Hooker’s  “  confidential  adviser,”  while  the 
latter  was  preparing  his  celebrated  books  “  Of  the 
Laws  of  Ecclesiastical  Polity.”  Old  Izaak  Walton 
gives  the  following  beautiful  picture  of  their  Chris¬ 
tian  intimacy  ; — “  These  two  excellent  persons 
began  a  holy  friendship,  increasing  daily  to  so 
high  and  mutual  affections,  that  their  two  wills 
seemed  to  be  but  one  and  the  same  ;  and  their 
designs,  both  for  the  glory  of  God,  and  peace  of 
the  church,  still  assisting  and  improving  each 
other’s  virtues,  and  the  desired  comforts  of  a 
peaceable  piety.” 


RICHARD  CLARKE - JOHN  LAIFIELD. 


97 


RICHARD  CLARKE. 

Dr.  Clarke  is  spoken  of  as  a  Fellow  of  Christ’s 
College,  Cambridge  ;  and  as  a  very  learned 
clergyman  and  eminent  preacher.  He  was  Vicar 
of  Minster  and  Monkton  in  Thanet,  and  one  of  the 
six  preachers  of  the  cathedral  church  in  Can¬ 
terbury.  He  died  in  1634.  Three  years  after 
his  death,  a  folio  volume  of  his  learned  sermons 
was  published.  But  alas  for  “  folios”  and  “  learn¬ 
ed  sermons”  in  these  days.  When  people  look 
on  such  a  thing,  they  are  ready  to  exclaim,  like 
Robert  Hall,  at  the  sight  of  Dr.  Gill’s  volumin¬ 
ous  Commentary, — “  What  a  continent  of  mud  !” 


JOHN  LAIFIELD. 

Dr.  Laifield  was  Fellow  of  Trinity  College,  Cam¬ 
bridge,  and  Rector  of  the  Church  of  St.  Cle¬ 
ment’s,  Dane’s,  in  London.  Of  him  it  is  said, 
“  that  being  skilled  in  architecture,  his  judgment 
was  much  relied  on  for  the  fabric  of  the  tab¬ 
ernacle  and  temple.”  He  died  at  his  rectory  in 
1617.  Few  things  are  more  difficult,  than  the 
giving  of  architectural  details  in  such  a  manner  as 

to  be  intelligible  to  the  unprofessional  reader. 

5 


98 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


ROBERT  TIGHE. 

This  name,  in  all  the  printed  lists  of  the 
Translators,  has  been  misspelled  Leigh.  It  should 
be  Teigh  or  Tiglie*  Dr.  Tighe  was  born  at 
Deeping,  Lincolnshire  ;  and  was  educated  part¬ 
ly  at  Oxford,  and  partly  at  Cambridge.  He 
was  Archdeacon  of  Middlesex  and  Vicar  of  the 
Church  of  All  Hallows,  Barking,  London.  He 
is  characterized  as  “  an  excellent  textuary  and 
profound  linguist.”  Dr.  Tighe  died  in  1620, 
leaving  to  his  son  an  estate  of  one  thousand 
pounds  a  year  ;  which  is  worth  mentioning  be¬ 
cause  so  rarely  done  by  men  of  the  clerical 
profession. 


ERANCIS  BURLEIGH. 

Dr.  Burleigh,  or  Burghley,  was  made  Vicar  of 
Bishop’s  Stortford  in  1590,  which  benefice  he 
held  at  the  time  of  his  appointment  to  the  im¬ 
portant  service  of  this  Bible  translation. 


*  See  Le  Neve’s  Fast  Eccles.  Ang.  P.  194.  Also  Wood’s 
Athencc,  wlio  adds,— “  linguist,”  and  “  therefore  employed  in  the 
Translation  of  the  Bible.” 


GEOFFRY  KING - RICHARD  THOMPSON. 


99 


GEOFFRY  KING. 

Mr.  King  was  Fellow  of  King’s  College,  Cam¬ 
bridge.  It  is  a  fair  token  of  his  fitness  to 
take  part  in  this  translation-work,  that  he  suc¬ 
ceeded  Mr.  Spaulding,  another  of  these  Trans¬ 
lators,  as  Regius  Professor  of  Hebrew  in  that 
University.  Men  were  not  appointed  in  those 
days  to  such  duties  of  instruction,  with  the  ex¬ 
pectation  that  they  would  qualify  themselves 
after  their  induction  into  office.* 


RICHARD  THOMPSON. 

Mr.  Thompson,  at  the  time  of  his  appointment, 
was  Fellow  of  Clare  Hall,  Cambridge.  Accord¬ 
ing  to  Wood  he  was  “a  Dutchman,  born  of  Eng¬ 
lish  parents.”  By  the  Presbyterian  divines,  he 
was  called  “the  grand  propagator  of  Arminian- 
ism.”  Of  the  prelatic  Arminians  Coleridge  too 
truly  said,  that  “  they  emptied  revelation  of  all 

*  The  late  Professor  Stuart  was  wont  jocularly  to  say,  that, 
when  he  was  appointed  Hebrew  professor  at  Andover,  all  he 
knew  of  the  language  was,  that  asfdrai  meant  blessed,  and 
ka-ish  meant  the  man  !  Psalm  1 :  1. 


100 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


the  doctrines  that  can  properly  be  said  to  have 
been  revealed .”  If  “  sin  be  the  greatest  heresy,” 
as  that  class  usually  affirms,  a  more  serious  error 
imputed  to  Mr.  Thompson  is  intemperance  in  his 
later  years.  As  to  his  literary  qualifications,  he 
is  described  by  the  learned  Richard  Montague  as 
“  a  most  admirable  philologer,”  who  was  “better 
known  in  Italy,  France,  and  Germany,  than  at 
home.” 


WILLIAM  BEDWELL. 

Mr.  Bedwell  was  educated  at  St.  John’s  College, 
Cambridge.  He  was  Vicar  of  Tottenham  High 
Cross,  near  London.  He  died  at  his  vicarage,  at 
the  age  of  seventy,  May  5th,  1632,  justly  reputed 
to  have  been  “an  eminent  oriental  scholar.”*  He 
published  in  quarto  an  edition  of  the  epistles  of 
St.  John  in  Arabic,  with  a  Latin  version,  printed 
at  the  press  of  Raphelengius,  at  Antwerp,  in 
1612.  He  also  left  many  Arabic  manuscripts  to 
the  University  of  Cambridge,  with  numerous 


*He  is  spoken  of  in  his  epitaph,  as  being  “for  the  Eastern 
tongues,  as  learned  a  man  as  most  lived  in  these  modern  times.  ’ 


WILLIAM  BEDWELL. 


101 


notes  upon  them,  and  a  font  of  types  for  printing 
them.  His  fame  for  Arabic  learning  was  so  great, 
that  when  Erpenius,  a  most  renowned  Orient¬ 
alist,  resided  in  England,  in  1606,  he  was  much 
indebted  to  Bedwell  for  direction  in  his  studies. 
To  Bedwell,  rather  than  to  Erpenius,  who  com¬ 
monly  enjoys  it,  belongs  the  honor  of  being  the 
first  who  considerably  promoted  and  revived  the 
study  of  the  Arabic  language  and  literature  in 
Europe.  He  was  also  tutor  to  another  Oriental¬ 
ist  of  renown,  Dr.  Pococke.  For  many  years, 
Mr.  Bedwell  was  engaged  in  preparing  an  Arabic 
Lexicon  in  three  volumes  ;  and  went  to  Holland 
to  examine  the  collections  of  Joseph  Scaliger. 
But  proceeding  very  slowly,  from  desire  to  make 
his  work  perfect  as  possible,  Golius  forestalled 
him,  by  the  publication  of  a  similar  work. 

After  Bedwell’s  death,  the  voluminous  manu¬ 
scripts  of  his  lexicon  were  loaned  by  the  Univer¬ 
sity  of  Cambridge  to  aid  in  the  compilation  of 
Dr.  Castell’s  colossal  work,  the  Lexicon  Heptag- 
lotton.  Some  modern  scholars  have  fancied,  that 
we  have  an  advantage  in  our  times  over  the 
translators  of  King  James’s  day,  by  reason  of  the 
greater  attention  which  is  supposed  to  be  paid  at 
present  to  what  are  called  the  “cognate”  and 
“  Shemitic”  languages,  and  especially  the  Arabic, 


102 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


by  which  much  light  is  thought  to  be  reflected 
upon  Hebrew  words  and  phrases.  It  is  evident, 
howrever,  that  Mr.  Bedwell  and  others,  among  his 
fellow-laborers,  were  thoroughly  conversant  in 
this  part  of  the  broad  field  of  sacred  criticism. 

Mr.  Bedwell  also  commenced  a  Persian  dic¬ 
tionary,  which  is  among  Archbishop  Laud’s  man¬ 
uscripts,  still  preserved  in  the  Bodleian  Library 
at  Oxford.  In  1615,  he  published  his  book,  “A 
Discovery  of  the  Impostures  of  Mahomet  and  of 
t-he  Koran.”  To  this  was  annexed  his  “Arabian 
Trudgeman.”  Trudgeman  or  truckman  is  the 
word  Dragoman  in  its  older  form,  and  is  derived 
from  a  Chaldee  word  meaning  interpreter.  This 
Arabian  Trudgeman  is  a  most  curious  illustration 
of  oriental  etymology  and  history. 

Dr.  Bedwell  had  a  fondness  for  mathematical 
studies.  He  invented  a  ruler  for  geometrical  pur¬ 
poses,  like  what  we  call  Gunter’s  Scale,  which 
went  by  the  name  of  “  Bedwell’s  Ruler.” 

This  closes  what  we  have  to  say  of  that  first 
Westminster  Company,  of  ten  members,  to 
whom  was  committed  the  historical  books,  be¬ 
ginning  with  Genesis  and  ending  with  the  Sec¬ 
ond  Book  of  Kings,  once  “  commonly  called,” 
as  its  title  still  says,  “The  Fourth  Book  of  the 
Kings.” 


EDWARD  LIVELY. 


103 


The  second  company  of  King  James’s  trans¬ 
lators  held  its  meetings  in  Cambridge.  To  this 
section  of  those  learned  divines,  was  assigned 
from  the  beginning  of  Chronicles  to  the  end  of 
“  The  Song  of  Songs,  which  is  Solomon’s.”  The 
eight  men  to  whom  this  important  part  of  the 
work  was  assigned,  were  no  whit  behind  their 
associates,  in  fitness  for  their  great  undertaking. 


EDWARD  LIVELY. 

4 

He  is  commemorated  as  “one  of  the  best  lin¬ 
guists  in  the  world.”  He  was  a  student,  and 
afterwards  a  fellow,  of  Trinity  College,  Cam¬ 
bridge,  and  King’s  Professor  of  Hebrew.  He 
was  actively  employed  in  the  preliminary  ar¬ 
rangements  for  the  Translation,  and  appears  to 
have  stood  high  in  the  confidence  of  the  King. 
Much  dependence  was  placed  on  his  surpassing 
skill  in  the  oriental  tongues.  But  his  death, 
which  took  place  in  May,  1605,  disappointed  all 
such  expectations ;  and  is  said  to  have  consider¬ 
ably  retarded  the  commencement  of  the  work. 
Some  say  that  his  death  was  hastened  by  his  too 
close  attention  to  the  necessary  preliminaries. 


104 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


His  stipend  had  been  but  small,  and  after  many 
troubles,  and  the  loss  of  his  wife,  the  mother  of  a 
numerous  family,  he  was  well  provided  for  by  Dr. 
Barlow,  that  he  might  be  enabled  to  devote  him¬ 
self  to  the  business  of  the  great  Translation. 
He  died  of  a  quinsy,  after  four  days’  illness,  leav¬ 
ing  eleven  orphans,  “  destitute  of  necessaries  for 
their  maintenance,  but  only  such  as  God,  and 
good  friends,  should  provide.”  He  was  author 
of  a  Latin  exposition  of  five  of  the  minor  Pro¬ 
phets,  and  of  a  work  on  chronology.  Dr.  Pusey, 
of  Oxford,  says,  that  Lively,  “  whom  Pococke 
never  mentions  but  with  great  respect,  was  prob¬ 
ably,  next  to  Pococke,  the  greatest  of  our  He¬ 
braists.” 


JOHN  RICHARDSON. 

This  profound  divine  wTas  born  at  Linton,  in 
Cambridgeshire.  He  was  first  Fellow  of  Eman¬ 
uel  College,  then  Master  of  Peterhouse  from 
1608  to  1615  ;  and  next  Master  of  Trinity  Col¬ 
lege.  He  was  also  King’s  Professor  of  Divinity. 
He  was  chosen  Vice-Chancellor  of  the  University 
in  1617,  and  again  in  1618.  He  died  in  1625, 


JOHN  RICHARDSON. 


105 


and  was  buried  in  Trinity  College  Chapel.  He 
left  a  bequest  of  one  hundred  pounds  to  Peter- 
house. 

He  was  noted  as  a  “  most  excellent  linguist,” 
as  every  good  theologian  must  be  ;  for,  as  Cole¬ 
ridge  says,  “  language  is  the  armory  of  the  hu¬ 
man  mind  ;  and  at  once  contains  the  trophies  of 
its  past,  and  the  weapons  of  its  future  conquests.” 

In  those  days,  it  was  the  custom,  at  seats  of 
learning,  for  the  ablest  men  to  hold  public  dis¬ 
putes,  in  the  Latin  tongue,  with  a  view  to  display 
their  skill  in  the  weapons  of  logic,  and  “  the  dia¬ 
lectic  fence.”  As  the  ancient  knights  delighted 
to  display  and  exercise  their  skill  and  strength  in 
running  at  tilt,  and  amicably  breaking  spears 
wTith  one  another  ;  so  the  great  scholars  used  to 
cope  with  each  other  in  the  arena  of  public  argu¬ 
ment,  and  strive  for  literary  “  masteries.”  Those 
scholastic  tournaments  were  sure  to  be  got  up 
whenever  the  halls  of  science  were  visited  by  the 
king,  or  some  chief  magnate  of  the  land  ;  and  the 
logical  conflicts,  always  conducted  in  the  Latin 
tongue,  were  attended  with  as  much  absorbing  in¬ 
terest  as  were  the  shows  of  gladiators  among  the 
Romans. 

On  such  an  occasion,  when  James  the  First 

was  visiting  Cambridge,  “  an  extraordinary  act 
5* 


106 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


in  divinity  was  kept  for  His  Majesty’s  entertain¬ 
ment.  Dr.  John  Davenant,  a  famous  man,  and 
afterwards  Bishop  of  Salisbury,  was  “  respond¬ 
ent.”  His  business  was  to  meet  all  comers,  who 
might  choose  to  assail  the  point  he  was  to  de¬ 
fend, — namely,  that  kings  might  never  be  excom¬ 
municated.  Well  did  Dr.  Davenant  urge  the 
wordy  war,  till  our  Dr.  Richardson  pushed  him 
tremendously  with  the  example  of  Ambrose,  the 
famous  Bishop  of  Milan,  who,  to  the  admiration 
of  the  whole  Christian  world,  excommunicated 
the  emperor  Theodosius  the  Great.  Here  was  a 
poser  !  King  James,  wdio  was  always  very  ner¬ 
vous  on  the  subject  of  regal  prerogative,  saw  that 
his  champion  was  staggering  under  that  stunning' 
fact  ;  and,  to  save  him,  cried  out  in  a  passion, — 

“  Verily,  this  was  a  great  piece  of  insolence  on 
the  part  of  Ambrose  !”*  To  this,  Dr.  Richardson 
calmly  rejoined, — “  A  truly  royal  response,  and 
worthy  of  Alexander  !  This  is  cutting  our  knotty 
arguments,  instead  of  untying  them.”f  And  so 
taking  his  seat,  he  desisted  from  further  discus¬ 
sion.  The  mild  dignity  of  this  remonstrance,  in 


*  Profecto  fuit  hoc  ab  Ambrosio  insolentissime  factum. 

f  Pesponsum  vere  regium,  et  Alexandra  dignum ;  hoc  est  non 
argumenta  dissolvere,  sed  desecare. 


LAWRENCE  CHADERTON. 


107 


which  independence  and  submission  are  happily 
combined,  presents  him  in  such  a  light  as  to  con¬ 
strain  us  to  regret  that  this  detached  incident  is 
about  all  we  know  of  the  personal  character  of 
the  man.  We  can  readily  believe  that  he  was  a 
wise  and  faithful,  as  well  as  learned,  Translator 
of  the  Book  of  God. 


LAWRENCE  CHADERTON. 

This  divine  was  a  staunch  Puritan,  brave  and 
godly,  learned  and  laborious,  full  of  moderation 
and  the  old  English  hardihood.  He  was  born  at 
Chaderton  in  Lancashire,  in  the  year  1537.  His 
family  wTas  wealthy,  but  bigotted  in  popery,  in 
which  religion  he  was  carefully  bred.  Being 
destined  to  the  bar,  he  was  sent  to  the  Inns  of 
Court,  at  London,  where  he  spent  some  years  in 
the  study  and  practice  of  the  law.  Here  he  be 
came  a  pious  protestant ;  and,  forsaking  the  law, 
entered,  as  student,  at  Christ’s  College,  Cam¬ 
bridge.  Oh  that,  in  a  far  higher  sense,  all  divin¬ 
ity-students  might  be  trained  in  Christ's  own 
college,  and  learn  their  science  from  the  Great 
Teacher  himself  ! 


108 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


These  changes  took  place  in  1564.  Mr.  Cha- 
derton  applied  to  his  father  for  some  pecuniary 
aid ;  but  the  wrathful  old  papist  “  sent  him  a 
poke,  with  a  groat  in  it,  to  go  a-begging  and 
disinherited  his  son  of  a  large  estate.  The  son 
had  no  occasion  to  use  the  begging-poke.  His 
high  character  and  scholarship  procured  him 
much  favor  ;  while  his  mind  was  sustained  by  the 
promises  of  the  Saviour,  for  whose  sake  he  had 
“  endured  the  loss  of  all  things.”  He  took  his 
first  degree  in  1567,  and  was  then  chosen  one  of 
the  Fellows  of  his  College.  He  became  Master 
of  Arts  in  1571  ;  and  Bachelor  of  Divinity  in 
1584.  He  did  not  receive  the  degree  of  Doctor 
in  Divinity  till  1613,  when  it  was  pressed  upon 
him,  at  the  time  when  Frederick,  Prince  Pala¬ 
tine  of  the  Rhine,  who  married  King  James’s 
daughter  Elizabeth,  visited  Cambridge  in  state. 
Fuller,  remarking  upon  this  matter,  writes, — 
“  What  is  said  of  Mount  Caucasus,  ‘  that  it  was 
never  seen  without  snow  on  the  top,’  was  true  of 
this  reverend  father,  whom  none  of  our  father’s 
generation  knew  in  the  University  before  he  was 
gray-headed.” 

“He  made  himself  familiar  with  the  Latin, 
Greek,  and  Hebrew  tongues,  and  was  thoroughly 
skilled  in  them.  Moreover  he  had  diligently  in- 


LAWRENCE  CHADERTON. 


109 


vestigated  the  numerous  writings  of  the  Rabbis, 
so  far  as  they  seemed  to  promise  any  aid  to  the 
understanding  of  the  Scriptures.  This  is  evident 
from  the  annotations  in  his  handwriting  appended 
to  the  Biblia  Bombergi,*  which  are  still  pre¬ 
served  in  the  library  of  Emanuel  College.”!  His 
studies  were  such  as  eminently  to  qualify  him  to 
bear  an  important  part  in  the  translating  of  the 
Bible.  In  1576,  he  held  a  public  dispute  with 
Dr.  Baron,  Margaret  Professor  of  Divinity,  upon 
the  Arminian  sentiments  of  the  latter.  In  this 
debate,  Dr.  Chaderton  appeared  to  the  highest 
advantage,  as  to  his  learning,  ability  and  temper. 

For  sixteen  years  he  was  lecturer  at  St.  Cle¬ 
ment’s  Church,  in  Cambridge,  where  his  preach¬ 
ing  was  greatly  blessed.  In  1578,  he  delivered 
a  sermon  at  Paul’s  Cross,  London,  which  appears 
to  have  been  his  only  printed  production.  About 
that  time,  by  order  of  Parliament,  he  was  ap¬ 
pointed  preacher  of  the  Middle  Temple,  with  a 
liberal  salary.  It  was  thought  best,  perhaps, 
that  a  flock  of  lawyers  should  have  the  gospel 


*  An  edition  of  the  Hebrew  Bible,  printed  by  Bomberg,  at 
Venice,  in  1518. 

t  Vita  Laurentii  Chadertoni,  a  W.  Dillingham,  S.  T.  P. 
Cantab.  1700.  Pp.  15,  24. 


110 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


preached  to  them  by  one  who  had  been  bred  to 
know  the  sins  of  their  calling. 

In  the  year  1584,  Sir  Walter  Mildmay,  one  of 
Queen  Elizabeth’s  noted  statesmen,  founded 
Emanuel  College,  at  Cambridge.  Sir  Walter 
was  not  supposed  to  be  a  very  high  Churchman, 
and  the  Queen  charged  him  with  having  “erected 
a  Puritan  foundation.”  In  reply,  he  told  her,  that 
he  had  set  an  acorn ,  which,  when  it  became  an 
oak ,  God  only  knows  what  will  become  of  it.” 
And  truly,  it  pleased  God,  that  it  should  yield 
plenteous  crops  of  Puritan  “hearts  of  oak;”  and 
afford  an  abundant  supply  of  that  sound,  substan¬ 
tial,  and  yet  spiritual  piety,  which  stands  in 
strong  contrast  with  all  superstition  and  formal¬ 
ity.  Emanuel  College  chapel,  by  order  of  the 
founder,  was  built  in  the  uncanonical  direction  of 
north  and  south.  Nearly  a  hundred  years  after, 
this  non-conforming  building  was  punished  by 
the  crabbed  prelates,  who  had  it  pulled  down, 
and  rebuilt  in  the  holy  position  of  east  and  west, 
agreeably  to  the  solemn  doctrine  of  the  “orienta¬ 
tion  of  churches  !”  Perhaps  there  was  no  better 
way  to  convert  it  from  the  Puritanism  wherewith 
it  was  infected,  than  thus  to  give  it  first  an  over¬ 
turn,  and  then  a  half  turn  toward  popery. 

It  is  likely,  however,  that  the  religious  pecu- 


LAWRENCE  CHADERTON. 


Ill 


liarities  which  long  marked  this  College  are  to 
be  ascribed  less  to  the  position  in  which  the 
chapel  was  placed,  than  to  the  influence  of  its 
first  Master.  For  this  important  office,  Sir 
Walter  Mildmay  made  choice  of  Dr.  Chaderton. 
The  modesty  of  the  latter  made  him  quite  reso¬ 
lute  to  refuse  the  station,  till  Sir  Walter  plainly 
told  him, — “  If  you  will  not  be  the  Master ,  I  will 
not  be  the  Founder .”  Upon  this,  Dr.  Chaderton 
accepted  the  office  ;  and  filled  it  with  zeal,  and 
industry,  and  high  repute,  for  thirty-eight  years. 
Through  his  exertions,  the  endowments  of  the 
institution  were  greatly  increased,  and  it  became 
a  nursing  mother  to  many  eminent  and  useful 
men. 

At  the  Hampton  Court  Conference,  in  1603, 
Dr.  Chaderton  was  one  of  the  four  divines  ap¬ 
pointed  by  the  King  as  being  “the  most  grave, 
learned,  and  modest  of  the  aggrieved  sort,”  to 
represent  the  Puritan  interest.  Dr.  Chaderton, 
however,  took  no  part  in  the  debates,  perceiv¬ 
ing  that  the  Conference  was  merely  a  royal  farce, 
got  up  to  give  the  tyrant  an  opportunity  to  avow 
his  bitter  hostility  to  Puritanism,  because  of  its 
incompatibility  with  abject  submission  to  abitrary 
power.  Coleridge,  who  was  a  staunch  adherent 
of  the  Church  of  England,  but  by  no  means 


112 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


blinded  on  that  account  to  the  truth  of  history, 
thus  expresses  his  opinion  as  to  the  Hampton 
Court  affair.  “  If  any  man,  who,  like  myself, 
hath  attentively  read  the  Church  history  of  the 
reign  of  Elizabeth,  and  the  Conference  before,  and 
with,  her  pedant  successor,  can  shew  me  any 
essential  difference  between  Whitgift  and  Ban¬ 
croft,  during  their  rule,  and  Bonner  and  Gardin¬ 
er  in  the  reign  of  Mary,  I  will  be  thankful  to  him 
in  my  heaTt,  and  for  him  in  my  prayers.  One 
difference  I  see, — namely,  that  the  former,  pro¬ 
fessing  the  New  Testament  to  be  their  rule  and 
guide,  and  making  the  fallibility  of  all  churches 
and  individuals  an  article  of  faith,  were  more  in¬ 
consistent,  and  therefore,  less  excusable  than  the 
popish  persecutors.”* 

It  was  during  his  mastership  of  Emanuel  Col¬ 
lege,  that  Dr.  Chaderton  was  engaged  in  the  Bi¬ 
ble  translation,  in  which  good  work  he  was  well 
fitted  and  disposed  to  take  his  part.  “  He  was  a 
scholar,  and  a  ripe  and  good  one.”  Having 
reached  his  three  score  years  and  ten,  his  know¬ 
ledge  was  fully  digested,  and  his  experience  ma¬ 
tured,  while  “  his  natural  force  was  not  abated,” 


*  Literary  Remains,  II.  388. 


LAWRENCE  CHADERTON. 


113 


and  his  faculties  burned  with  unabated  fire.  Even 
to  the  close  of  his  long  life,  “  his  eye  was  not 
dim,”  and  his  sight  required  no  artificial  aid. 

Many  years  after,  in  1622,  having  reached  the 
great  age  of  eighty-five,  this  Nestor  among  the 
divines  resigned  the  office  he  had  so  long  sus¬ 
tained.  Not  that  he  was  even  then  disqualified 
for  its  duties  by  infirmity  ;  but  because  of  the 
rapid  spread  of  Arminianism,  and  the  fear  that,  if 
the  business  were  left  till  after  his  death,  a  di¬ 
vine  of  lax  sentiments,  who  was  then  waiting  his 
chance,  would  be  thrust  into  the  place  by  the  in¬ 
terference  of  the  Court.  The  business  was  so 
managed,  that  Dr.  Preston,  the  very  champion  of 
the  Puritans,  was  inducted  as  Dr.  Chaderton’s 
successor.  The  vivacious  patriarch,  however, 
lived  to  survive  Dr.  Preston  ;  and  to  see  Dr.  San- 
croft,  and  after  him,  Dr.  Holdsworth,  in  the  same 
station.  This  latter  incumbent  preached  Dr. 
Chaderton’s  funeral  sermon.  Dr.  Holdsworth 
used  to  tell  him,  that,  as  long  as  he  lived,  he 
should  be  Master  in  the  house,  though  he  him¬ 
self  was  forced  to  be  Master  of  the  house.  The 
patriarch  was  always  consulted  as  to  the  affairs 
of  the  College. 

The  most  protracted  and  useful  life  must  come 
to  its  end.  There  have  been  various  accounts  of 


114 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


the  time  of  Dr.  Chaderton’s  death,  and  of  the 
place  of  his  interment.  But  all  mistakes  are 
corrected  by  his  Latin  epitaph,  which  has  been 
found  on  a  monumental  stone,  at  the  entrance  of 
Emanuel  College  chapel,  and  has  been  translated 
as  follows ; 

Here 

lies  the  body  of 
Lawrence  Chaderton,  D.  D., 
who  was  the  first  Master  of  this  College. 

He  died  in  the  year  1640, 
in  the  one  hundred  and  third 
year  of  his  age. 

Perhaps  such  longevity  was  more  common  then 
than  now.  It  is  on  record,  that  “ten  men  of 
Herefordshire,  a  nest  of  Nestors,  once  danced 
the  Morish  before  King  James,  their  united  ages 
exceeding  a  thousand  years.”  Their  contempo¬ 
rary,  Dr.  Chaderton,  was  more  honored  by  the 
gravity  of  his  gray  hairs,  than  they  by  the  levity 
of  their  giddy  heels. 

He  was  greatly  venerated.  All  his  habits 
were  such  as  inspired  confidence  in  his  piety. 
During  the  fifty-three  years  of  his  married  life, 
he  never  suffered  any  of  his  servants  to  be  de¬ 
tained  from  public  worship  by  the  preparation  of 
food,  or  other  household  cares.  He  used  to  say, 


LAWRENCE  CHADERTON. 


115 


— “I  desire  as  much  to  have  my  servants  to 
know  the  Lord,  as  myself.”  These  things  are 
greatly  to  his  honor  ;  though  his  regard  to  the 
Lord’s  Day  may  excite  the  scorn  of  some  in 
these  degenerate  times. 

Dr.  Chaderton  is  described  by  Archdeacon 
Echard,  as  “a  grave,  pious,  and  excellent  preach¬ 
er.”  As  an  instance  of  his  power  in  the  pulpit, 
we  will  close  this  sketch  with  an  incident  which 
could  hardly  have  taken  place  any  where  on 
earth  for  the  last  hundred  years.  It  is  stated  on 
high  authority,  that  while  our  aged  saint  was  vis¬ 
iting  some  friends  in  his  native  county  of  Lanca¬ 
shire,  he  was  invited  to  preach.  Having  ad¬ 
dressed  his  audience  for  two  full  hours  by  the 
glass,  he  paused  and  said, — “  I  will  no  longer 
trespass  on  your  patience.”  And  now  comes  the 
marvel  ;  for  the  whole  congregation  cried  out 
with  one  consent, — “  For  God’s  sake,  go  on,  go 
on  !”  He,  accordingly,  proceeded  much  longer , 
to  their  great  satisfaction  and  delight.  “  When,” 
says  Coleridge,  “after  reading  the  biographies  of 
[Izaak]  Walton  and  his  contemporaries,  I  reflect 
on  the  crowded  congregations,  who  with  intense 
interest  came  to  their  hour-and-two-hour-long 
sermons,  I  cannot  but  doubt  the  fact  of  any  true 
progression,  moral  or  intellectual,  in  the  mind  of 


116  THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 

the  many.  The  tone,  the  matter,  the  anticipated 
sympathies  in  the  sermons  of  an  age,  form  the 
best  moral  criterion  of  the  character  of  that  age.” 
Let  us  not  be  so  unwise  as  to  inquire  concerning 
this,  “  What  is  the  cause  that  the  former  days 
were  better  than  these  ?”  For  even  now  people 
like  to  hear  such  preaching  as  is  preaching.  But 
where  shall  we  find  men  for  the  work  like  those 
who  gave  us  our  version  of  the  Bible  ? 


FRANCIS  DILLINGHAM. 

He  was  a  Fellow  of  Christ’s  College,  Cam¬ 
bridge.  After  the  translation  was  finished,  he 
became  parson  of  Dean,  his  native  place,  in 
Bedfordshire.  He  also  obtained  the  rich  be¬ 
nefice  of  Wilden,  in  the  same  County,  where  he 
died  a  single  and  wealthy  man.  “  My  father,” 
says  worthy  old  Thomas  Fuller,  “  was  present  in 
the  bachelor’s  school,  when  a  Greek  act  was 
kept*  between  Francis  Dillingham  and  William 
Alabaster,  to  their  mutual  commendation.  A 
disputation  so  famous,  that  it  served  for  an  era  or 


*  That  is,  a  debate  carried  on  in  the  Greek  tongue. 


ROGER  ANDREWS. 


117 


epoch,  for  the  scholars  in  that  age,  thence  to 
date  their  seniority.”  From  this,  it  would  seem, 
that  he  was  not  without  reason  styled  the  “  great 
Grecian.”  He  was  noted  as  an  excellent  linguist 
and  a  subtle  disputant,  and  was  author  of  various 
theological  treatises.  His  brother  and  heir, 
Thomas  Dillingham,  also  minister  of  Dean,  was 
chosen  one  of  the  famous  Assembly  of  Divines  at 
Westminster;  but  on  account  of  age,  illness, 
and  for  other  reasons,  did  not  take  his  seat. 
Francis  Dillingham  was  a  diligent  writer,  both 
of  practical  and  polemical  divinity.  He  col¬ 
lected  out  of  Cardinal  Bellarmine’s  writings,  all 
the  concessions  made  by  that  acute  author  in 
favor  of  Protestantism.  He  published  a  Manual 
of  the  Christian  faith,  taken  from  the  Fathers, 
and  a  variety  of  treatises  on  different  points  be¬ 
longing  to  the  Romish  controversy. 


ROGER  ANDREWS. 

Dr.  Andrews,  who  had  been  Fellow  in  Pem¬ 
broke  Hall,  was  Master  of  Jesus  College,  Cam¬ 
bridge.  He  also  became  Prebendary  of  Chi¬ 
chester  and  Southwell.  He  too  was  a  famous 
linguist  in  his  time,  like  his  brother  Lancelot, 


118 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


the  Bishop  of  Winchester,  whose  life  has  been 
already  sketched  as  President  of  the  first  com¬ 
pany  of  the  Translators. 


THOMAS  HARRISON. 

He  had  been  student  and  Fellow  of  Trinity 
College,  Cambridge  ;  and  was  now  Vice-Master 
of  that  important  seminary.  Thomas  Fuller  re¬ 
cords  the  following  instance  of  his  meekness  and 
charity.  “I  remember  when  the  reverend  Vice- 
Master  of  Trinity  College  in  Cambridge  was  told 
that  one  of  the  scholars  had  abused  him  in  an 
oration.  ‘  Did  he,’  said  he,  ‘  name  me  ?  Did  he 
name  Thomas  Harrison?’  And  when  it  was  re¬ 
turned  that  he  named  him  not, — ‘Then,’  said  he, 
£I  do  not  believe  that  he  meant  me.’”  We  have 
a  strong  evidence  of  his  reputation  in  the  Uni¬ 
versity  in  another  duty  which  was  assigned  him. 
“  On  account  of  his  exquisite  skill  in  the  Hebrew" 
and  Greek  idioms,  he  was  one  of  the  chief  exam¬ 
iners  in  the  'University  of  those  who  sought  to  be 
public  professors  of  these  languages.”* 


*  Harrisonus  Honoratus,  etc.  a  C.  Dalechampio.  Cantab, 
1632.  P.  7. 


ROBERT  SPAULDING. 


119 


ROBERT  SPAULDING. 

Dr.  Spaulding  was  Fellow  of  St.  John’s  Col¬ 
lege,  Cambridge.  He  succeeded  Edward  Lively, 
of  whom  we  have  briefly  spoken,  as  Regius  Pro¬ 
fessor  of  Hebrew. 


ANDREW  BING. 

Dr.  Bing  was  Fellow  of  Peterhouse,  Cam¬ 
bridge.  In  course  of  time  he  succeeded  Geoffry 
King,  who  was  Dr.  Spaulding’s  successor,  in  the 
Regius  Professorship  of  Hebrew.  Dr.  Bing  was 
Sub-dean  of  York  in  1606,  and  was  installed 
Archdeacon  of  Norwich  in  1618.  Fie  died  during 
the  times  of  the  Commonwealth. 


These  brief  notices  suffice  to  shew  that  the 
members  of  this  company  deserved  their  places 
among  the  translators.  The  quiet  and  unevent¬ 
ful  lives  of  these  secluded  students  and  deep 
divines  have  left  no  strongly  marked  incidents 
on  the  historic  page.  But  their  learning  still 
lives  and  instructs  on  the  pages  of  their  immortal 
work. 


120 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


The  third  company  of  the  Translators,  com¬ 
posed  of  Oxford  divines,  met  at  that  famous  seat 
of  learning,  and  was  fully  equal  to  any  other  of 
these  companies  in  qualifications  for  their  im¬ 
portant  undertaking.  The  part  assigned  to  this 
division  was  from  the  beginning  of  Isaiah  to  the 
end  of  the  Old  Testament. 

JOHN  HARDING. 

This  divine  was  president  in  his  company  ;  a 
station  which  shews  how  high  he  ranked  among 
his  brethren  who  knew  him;  though  but  little 
relating  to  his  character  and  history  has  come 
down  to  our  times.  The  offices  filled  by  him 
were  such  as  to  confirm  the  opinion  that  his 
learning  and  piety  entitled  him  to  the  position  he 
occupied  in  this  venerable  society  of  scholars. 
At  the  time  of  his  appointment  to  aid  in  the 
translation  of  the  Bible,  he  had  been  Royal 
Professor  of  Hebrew  in  the  University  for 
thirteen  years.  His  occupancy  of  that  chair,  at 
a  time  when  the  study  of  sacred  literature  was 
pursued  by  thousands  with  a  zeal  amounting  to 
a  passion,  is  a  fair  intimation  that  Dr.  Harding 
was  the  man  for  the  post  he  occupied.  When 
commissioned  by  the  King  to  take  part  in  this 


JOHN  HARDING - JOHN  REYNOLDS.  121 

version  of  the  Scriptures,  Dr.  Harding  was  also 
President  of  Magdalen  College.  He  was  at  the 
same  time  rector  of  Halsey,  in  Oxfordshire.  The 
share  which  he,  with  his  brethren,  performed, 
was,  perhaps,  the  most  difficult  portion  of  the 
translation-work.  The  skill  and  beauty  with 
which  it  is  accomplished  are  a  fair  solution  of  the 
problem,  “  How,  two  languages  being  given,  the 
nearest  approximation  may  be  made  in  the 
second,  to  the  expression  of  ideas  already  con¬ 
veyed  through  the  medium  of  the  first?” 


JOHN  REYNOLDS 

This  famous  divine,  though  he  died  m  the 
course  of  the  good  work,  deserves  especial  men¬ 
tion,  because  it  was  by  his  means  that  the  good 
work  itself  was  undertaken.  He  was  born  in 
Penhoe,  in  Devonshire,  in  the  year  1549.  He 
entered  the  University  at  the  age  of  thirteen,  and 
spent  all  his  days  within  its  precincts.  Though 
he  at  first  entered  Merton  College  in  1562,  he 
was  chiefly  bred  at  Corpus  Christi,  which  he 
entered  the  next  year,  and  where  he  became  a 
Fellow  in  1566,  at  the  early  age  of  seventeen. 


6 


122 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


Six  years  later  he  was  made  Greek  Lecturer  in 
his  college,  which  was  proud  of  the  early  ripe¬ 
ness  of  his  powers. 

About  this  time  occurred  one  of  the  most  sin¬ 
gular  events  in  the  history  of  religious  contro¬ 
versy.  John  Reynolds  was  a  zealous  papist. 
His  brother  William,  who  was  his  fellow-student, 
was  equally  zealous  for  protestantism.  Each,  in 
fraternal  anxiety  for  the  salvation  of  a  brother’s 
soul,  labored  for  the  conversion  of  the  other;  and 
each  of  them  was  successful  !  As  the  result  of 
long  conference  and  disputation,  William  became 
an  inveterate  papist,  and  so  lived  and  died. 
While  John  became  a  decided  protest-ant  of  the 
Puritan  stamp,  and  continued  to  his  death  to  he 
a  vigorous  champion  of  the  Reformation.  From 
the  time  of  his  conversion,  he  was  a  most  able 
and  successful  preacher  of  God’s  word.  Having 
very  greatly  distinguished  himself  in  the  year 
1578,  as  a  debater  in  the  theological  discussions, 
or  “  divinity-acts”  of  the  LTniversity,  he  was 
drawn  into  the  popish  controversy.  Determined 
to  explore  the  whole  field,  and  make  himself  mas¬ 
ter  of  the  subject,  he  devoted  himself  to  the  study 
of  the  Scriptures  in  the  original  tongues,  and  read 
all  the  Greek  and  Latin  fathers,  and  all  the  an¬ 
cient  records  of  the  Church.  Nor  did  this  flood 


JOHN  REYNOLDS. 


123 


of  reading  roll  out  of  his  mind  as  fast  as  it  poured 
in.  It  is  stated  that  “his  memory  was  little  less 
than  miraculous.  He  could  readily  turn  to  any 
material  passage,  in  every  leaf,  page,  column  and 
paragraph  of  the  numerous  and  voluminous  works 
he  had  read.”  He  came  to  be  styled  “  the  very 
treasury  of  erudition  and  was  spoken  of  as  “  a 
living  library,  and  a  third  university.” 

About  the  year  1578,  John  Hart,  a  popish  zea¬ 
lot,  challenged  all  the  learned  men  in  the  nation 
to  a  public  debate.  At  the  solicitation  of  one  of 
Queen  Elizabeth’s  privy  counsellors,  Mr.  Rey¬ 
nolds  encountered  him.  After  several  combats, 
the  Romish  champion  owned  himself  driven  from 
the  field.  An  account  of  the  conferences,  sub¬ 
scribed  by  both  parties,  was  published,  and  wide¬ 
ly  circulated!  This  added  greatly  tg  the  reputa¬ 
tion  of  Mr.  Reynolds,  who  soon  after  took  his  de¬ 
grees  in  divinity,  and  was  appointed  by  the  Queen 
to  be  Royal  Professor  of  Divinity  in  the  Univer¬ 
sity.  At  that  time,  the  celebrated  Cardinal  Bel- 
larmine,  the  Goliah  of  the  Philistines  at  Rome, 
was  professor  of  theology  in  the  English  Sem¬ 
inary  at  that  city.  As  fast  as  he  delivered  his 
popish  doctrine,  it  was  taken  down  in  writing, 
and  regularly  sent  to  Dr.  Reynolds  ;  who,  from 
time  to  time,  publicly  confuted  it  at  Oxford. 


124 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


Thus  Bellarmine’s  books  were  answered,  even 
before  they  were  printed. 

It  is  said,  that  Reynolds’  professorship  was 

♦ 

founded  by  the  royal  bounty  for  the  express  pur¬ 
pose  of  strengthening  the  Church  of  England 
against  the  Church  of  Rome,  and  of  widening 
the  breach  between  them  ;  and  that  Dr.  Rey¬ 
nolds  was  first  placed  in  the  chair,  on  that  ac¬ 
count,  because  of  his  strenuous  opposition  to  the 
corruptions  of  Rome.  “  Oxford  divines,”  at  that 
period,  were  of  a  very  different  stamp  from  their 
Puseyite  successors  in  our  day.  But  even  at  Ox¬ 
ford,  there  are  faithful  witnesses  for  the  truth. 
Dr.  Hampden,  whose  appointment  to  the  bishop¬ 
ric  of  Hereford,  a  few  years  since,  raised  such  a 
storm  of  opposition  from  the  Romanizing  prelates 
and  clergy,  was  for  many  years  a  worthy  suc¬ 
cessor  of  Dr.  Reynolds,  in  that  chair  which  was 
endowed  so  long  ago  for  maintaining  the  Church 
of  England  against  the  usurpations  of  Rome. 

Yet  even  so  long  ago,  and  ever  since,  there 
were  persons  there  whose  sentiments  resembled 
what  is  now  called  by  the  sublime  title  of  Pusey- 
ism.  The  first  reformers  of  the  English  Church 
held,  as  Archbishop  Whately  does  now,  that  the 
primitive  church-government  was  highly  popular 
in  its  character.  But  they  held  that  neither  this, 


JOHN  REYNOLDS. 


125 


nor  any  other  form  of  discipline,  was  divinely 
ordained  for  perpetual  observance.  They  con¬ 
sidered  it  to  be  the  prerogative  of  the  civil  gov¬ 
ernment,  in  a  Christian  land,  to  regulate  these 
matters,  and  to  organize  the  Church,  as  it  would 
the  army,  or  the  judiciary  and  police,  with  a  view 
to  the  greatest  efficiency  according  to  the  state 
of  circumstances.  They  held  that  all  good  sub¬ 
jects  were  religiously  bound  to  conform  to  the 
arrangements  thus  made.  These  views  are  what 
is  commonly  called  Erastianism.  The  claim  of  a 
“-divine  right  ”  was  first  advanced  in  England  in 
behalf  of  Presbyterianism.  It  was  very  strenuous¬ 
ly  asserted  by  the  learned  and  long-suffering 
Cartwright.  Some  of  the  Episcopal  divines  soon 
took  the  hint,  and  set  up  the  same  claim  in  be¬ 
half  of  their  order  ;  though,  at  first,  it  sounded 
strange  even  to  their  own  brethren.* 


*  “  Dr.  Peter  Heylin,  preaching  at  Westminster  Abbey,  before 
Bishop  Williams,  accused  the  non- conformists  of  ‘putting  all  in¬ 
to  open  tumult,  rather  than  conform  to  the  lawful  government 
derived  from  Christ  and  his  apostles.’  At  this,  the  Bishop,  sit¬ 
ting  in  the  great  pew,  knocked  aloud  with  his  staff  upon  the  pul¬ 
pit,  saying, — ‘No  more  of  that  point  !  no  more  of  that  point, 
Peter  !’  To  whom  Heylin  answered, — ‘  I  have  a  little  more  to 
say,  my  lord,  and  then  I  have  done  — and  so  finished  his  sub¬ 
ject.”—  Biog.  Brit.  IY.  2597.  Ed.  1747. 


126 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


Dr.  Bancroft,  Archbishop  Whitgift’s  chaplain, 
and  his  successor  in  the  see  of  Canterbury,  main¬ 
tained  in  a  sermon,  preached  January  12th,  1588, 
that  “  bishops  were  a  distinct  order  from  priests ; 
and  that  they  had  a  superiority  over  them  by  di¬ 
vine  right ,  and  directly  from  God.”  This  startling 
doctrine  produced  a  great  excitement.  Sir  Fran¬ 
cis  Knollys,  one  of  Queen  Elizabeth’s  distin¬ 
guished  statesmen,  remonstrated  warmly  with 
Whitgift  against  it.  In  a  letter  to  Sir  Francis, 
who  had  requested  his  opinion,  Dr.  Reynolds  ob¬ 
serves, —  “  All  who  have  labored  in  reforming  the 
Church,  for  five  hundred  years,  have  taught  that 
all  pastors,  whether  they  are  entitled  bishops  or 
priests,  have  equal  authority  and  power  by  God’s 
word  ;  as  the  Waldenses,  next  Marsilius  Patavi- 
nus,  then  Wiclif  and  his  scholars,  afterwards 
Huss  and  the  Hussites  ;  and  Luther,  Calvin, 
Brentius,  Bullinger,  and  Musculus.  Among  our¬ 
selves,  we  have  bishops,  the  Queen’s  professors 
of  divinity,  and  other  learned  men,  as  Bradford, 
Lambert,  Jewell,  Pilkington,  Humphrey,  Fulke, 
&c.  But  why  do  I  speak  of  particular  persons  ? 
It  is  the  opinion  of  the  Reformed  Churches  oi 
Helvetia,  Savoy,  France,  Scotland,  Germany, 
Hungary,  Poland,  the  Low  Countries,  and  our 
own.  I  hope  Dr.  Bancroft  will  not  say,  that  all 


JOHN  REYNOLDS. 


127 


these  have  approved  that  for  sound  doctrine, 
which  was  condemned  by  the  general  consent  of 
the  whole  church  as  heresy,  in  the  most  flourish¬ 
ing  time.  I  hope  he  whll  acknowledge  that  he 
wTas  overseen ,  when  he  announced  the  superiority 
of  bishops  over  the  rest  of  the  clergy  to  be  GocVs 
own  ordinance .” 

Good  Dr.  Reynolds’  charitable  hopes,  though 
backed  by  such  an  overwhelming  array  of  author¬ 
ities,  were  doomed  to  be  disappointed.  Ban- 

% 

croft’s  novel  doctrine  has  been  in  fashion  ever 
since.  Still  there  are  not  wanting  many  who 
soundly  hold,  in  the  words  of  Reynolds,  that 
“unto  us  Christians,  no  land  is  strange,  no 
ground  unholy  ;  every  coast  is  Jewry,  every  town 
Jerusalem,  every  house  Sion  ;  and  every  faithful 
company,  yea,  every  faithful  body,  a  temple  to 
serve  God  in.  The  presence  of  Christ  among 
two  or  three,  gathered  together  in  his  name, 
maketh  any  place  a  church,  even  as  the  presence 
of  a  king  with  his  attendants  maketh  any  place  a 
court.” 

Notwithstanding  that  Elizabeth  was  no  lover 

of  men  puritanically  inclined,  she  felt  constrained 

*  ~ 

to  notice  the  eminent  gifts  and  services  of  Dr. 
Reynolds.  In  1598,  she  made  him  Dean  of  Iun- 
coln,  and  offered  him  a  bishopric.  The  latter 


128 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


dignity  he  meekly  refused,  preferring  his  studious 
academical  life  to  the  wealth  and  honors  of  any 
such  ecclesiastical  station.  It  is  supposed,  how¬ 
ever,  that  conscientious  scruples  had  much  to  do 
with  his  declining  the  prelatic  office. 

He  resigned  his  deanery  in  less  than  a  year, 
and  also  the  Mastership  of  Queen’s  College, 
which  latter  post  he  had  for  some  time  occupied 
He  was  then  chosen  President  of  Corpus  Christi 
College,  in  which  office  he  wras  exceedingly  ac¬ 
tive  and  useful  till  his  death.  This  College  had 
long  been  badly  infested  with  papistry.  The 
presidency  being  vacant  in  1568,  the  Queen  sent 
letters  to  the  Fellows,  calling  upon  them  to  make 
choice  of  Dr.  William  Cole,  who  had  been  one  of 
the  exiles  in  the  time  of  Queen  Mary.  The 
Fellows,  however,  made  choice  of  Robert  Har¬ 
rison,  formerly  one  of  their  number,  hut  an 
open  Romanist.  The  Queen  pronounced  this 
election  void,  and  commanded  them  to  elect 
Cole.  On  their  refusal,  I)r.  Horn,  Bishop  of 
Winchester,  the  Visitor  of  the  College,  was  sent 
to  induct  Cole  ;  w-hich  he  did,  but  not  till  he 

had  forced  the  College-gates.  A  commission, 

*• 

appointed  by  the  Queen,  expelled  three  of  the 
most  notorious  papists.  As  might  have  been 
expected,  there  was  but  little  harmony  in  that 


JOHN  REYNOLDS. 


129 


society.  In  1579,  Dr.  Reynolds  was  expelled 
from  his  College,  together  with  his  pupil,  the 
renowned  Richard  Hooker,  author  of  the  “  Ec¬ 
clesiastical  Polity,”  and  three  others.  On  what 
ground  this  was  done  is  not  known.  It  was  the 
act  of  Dr.  John  Barfoote,  then  Vice-President  of 
the  College,  and  Chaplain  to  the  potent  Earl 
of  Warwick.  In  less  than  a  month,  the  expelled 
members  were  fully  restored  by  the  agency 
of  Secretary  Walsingham.  In  1586,  this  Sir 
Francis  Walsingham  offered  a  stipend  for  a  lec¬ 
tureship  on  controversial  divinity,  for  the  purpose, 
as  Heylin,  that  rabid  Laudian,  says,  of  making 
“the  religion  of  the  Church  of  Rome  more 
odious.”  Dr.  Reynolds  accepted  this  lecture- 
ship,  and  for  that  purpose  resigned  his  fellowship 
in  the  College  ;  “dissentions  and  factions  there,” 
as  he  says,  “having  made  him  weary  of  the 
place.”  He  retired  to  Queen’s  College,  and  was 
Master  there,  till,  as  has  been  stated,  he  became 
President  of  Corpus  Christi  in  1598,  on  the 
resignation  of  Dr.  Cole.  Dr.  Barfoote  struggled 
hard  to  secure  the  post ;  but  by  the  firm  pro¬ 
cedure  of  that  “so  noble  and  worthy  knight  Sir 
Francis  Walsingham,”  Dr.  Reynolds  carried  the 
day. 

King  James  appointed  him,  in  1603,  to  be  one 
6* 


130  THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 

of  the  four  divines  who  should  represent  the 
Puritan  interest  at  the  Hampton  Court  Con¬ 
ference.  Here  he  was  almost  the  only  speaker 
on  his  side  of  the  question  ;  and  confronted  the 
King  and  Primate,  with  eight  bishops,  and  as 
many  deans.  The  records  of  what  took  place 
are  wholly  from  the  pens  of  his  adversaries,  who 
are  careful  that  he  should  not  appear  to  any  great 
advantage.  It  is  manifest  from  their  own  ac¬ 
count,  that,  in  this  ‘‘mock  conference,”  as  Rapin 
calls  it,  the  Puritans  were  so  overborne  with 
kingly  insolence  and  prelatic  pride,  that,  finding 
it  of  no  use  to  attempt  any  replies,  they  held 
their  peace.  In  fact,  the  whole  affair  was  merely 
got  up  to  give  the  King,  who  had  newly  come  to 
the  throne  of  England,  an  opportunity  to  declare 
himself  as  to  the  line  of  ecclesiastical  policy  he 
meant  to  pursue. 

The  only  good  that  resulted  from  this  op¬ 
pressive  and  insulting  conference  was  our  pre¬ 
sent  admirable  translation  of  the  Bible.  The 
King  scornfully  rejected  nearly  every  other 
request  of  the  Puritans  ;*  but,  at  the  entreaty  of 


*  Their  requests  were  very  reasonable,  viz.:  1.  “That  the 
doctrine  of  the  Church  might  be  preserved  pure,  according  to 
God's  word.  2.  That  good  pastors  might  be  planted  in  all 


JOHN  REYNOLDS. 


131 


Dr.  Reynolds,  consented  that  there  should  be 
a  new  and  more  accurate  translation,  prepared 
under  the  royal  sanction.  The  next  year  Dr. 
Reynolds  was  put  upon  the  list  of  Translators, 
on  account  of  his  well  known  skill  in  the  Hebrew 
and  Greek.  He  labored  in  the  work  with  zeal, 
bringing  all  his  vast  acquisitions  to  aid  in  accom¬ 
plishing  the  task,  though  he  did  not  live  to  see 
it  completed.  In  the  progress  of  it,  he  was 
seized  with  the  consumption,  yet  he  continued 
his  assistance  to  the  last.  During  his  decline, 
the  company  to  which  he  belonged  met  regularly 
every  week  in  his  chamber,  to  compare  and  per¬ 
fect  what  they  had  done  in  their  private  studies. 
Thus  he  ended  his  days  like  Venerable  Rede ; 
and  “  was  employed  in  translating  the  Word  of 
Life,  even  till  he  himself  was  translated  to  life 
everlasting.”  His  days  were  thought  to  be 
shortened  by  too  intense  application  to  study. 
But  when  urged  by  friends  to  desist,  he  would 
reply, — “  Non  propter  vitam,  vivendi  perdere 
causas,” — for  the  sake  of  life,  he  would  not  lose 


churches,  to  preach  the  same.  3.  That  church  government 

/ 

might  be  sincerely  ministered,  according  to  God’s  word.  4. 
That  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer  might  be  fitted  to  more  in¬ 
crease  of  piety.” 


132 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


the  very  end  of  living  !  During  his  sickness,  his 
time  was  wholly  taken  up  in  prayer,  and  in  hear¬ 
ing  and  translating  the  Scriptures. 

The  papists  started  a  report,  that  their  famous 
opposer  had  recanted  his  protestant  sentiments. 
He  was  much  grieved  at  hearing  the  rumor  ;  but 
being  too  feeble  to  speak,  set  his  name  to  the 
following  declaration, — “  These  are  to  testify  to 
all  the  world,  that  I  die  in  the  possession  of  that 
faith  which  I  have  taught  all  my  life,  both  in  my 
preachings  and  in  my  writings,  with  an  assured 
hope  of  my  salvation,  only  by  the  merits  of  Christ 
my  Saviour.”  The  next  day,  May  21st,  1607,  he 
expired  in  the  sixty-eighth  year  of  his  age.  He 
was  buried  in  the  chapel  of  his  College,  with 
great  solemnity  and  academic  pomp,  and  the  gen¬ 
eral  lamentation  of  good  men. 

His  industry  and  piety  are  largely  attested  by 
his  numerous  writings,  which  long  continued  in 
high  esteem.  Old  Anthony  Wood,  though  so 
cynical  toward  all  Puritans,  says  of  him,  that  he 
was  “  most  prodigiously  seen  in  all  kinds  of  learn¬ 
ing  ;  most  excellent  in  all  tongues.”  “He  was  a 
prodigy  in  reading,”  adds  Anthony,  “  famous  in 
doctrine,  and  the  very  treasury  of  erudition ;  and 
in  a  word,  nothing  can  be  spoken  against  him, 
only  that  he  was  the  pillar  of  Puritanism ,  and 


JOHN  REYNOLDS. 


133 


the  grand  favorer  of  non-conformity .”  Dr. 
Crackenthorpe,  his  intimate  acquaintance,  though 
a  zealous  churchman,  gives  this  account  of  him, 
— “  He  turned  over  all  writers,  profane,  ecclesi¬ 
astical,  and  divine  ;  and  all  the  councils,  fathers, 
and  histories  of  the  Church.  He  was  most  ex¬ 
cellent  in  all  tongues  useful  or  ornamental  to  a 
divine.  He  had  a  sharp  and  ready  wit,  a  grave 
and  mature  judgment,  and  was  indefatigably  in¬ 
dustrious.  He  was  so  well  skilled  in  all  arts  and 
sciences,  as  if  he  had  spent  his  whole  life  in  each 
of  them.  And  as  to  virtue,  integrity,  piety,  and 
sanctity  of  life,  he  was  so  eminent  and  conspicu¬ 
ous,  that  to  name  Reynolds  is  to  commend  virtue 
itself.”  From  other  testimonies  of  a  like  charac¬ 
ter,  let  the  following  be  given,  from  the  celebra¬ 
ted  Bishop  Hall  of  Norwich, — “  He  alone  was  a 
well-furnished  library,  full  of  ail  faculties,  all 
studies,  and  all  learning.  The  memory  and  read¬ 
ing  of  that  man  were  near  to  a  miracle.” 

Such  was  one  of  the  worthies  in  that  noble 
company  of  Translators.  Nothing  can  tend  more 
to  inspire  confidence  in  their  version  than  the 
knowledge  of  their  immense  acquirements,  almost 
incredible  to  the  superficial  scholars  in  this  age 
of  smatterers,  sciolists,  and  pretenders.  How 
much  more  to  be  coveted  is  the  accumulation  of 


134 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


knowledge,  and  the  dispensing  of  its  riches  to 
numerous  generations,  than  the  amassing  of  mo 
ney,  and  the  bequeathing  of  hoarded  wealth. 
Who  would  not  choose  the  Christian  erudition  of 
an  Andrews  or  a  Reynolds,  rather  than  the  mil¬ 
lions  of  Astor  or  Girard  ? 


THOMAS  HOLLAND. 

This  good  man  was  born  at  Ludlow,  in  Shrop¬ 
shire,  in  the  year  1539.  He  was  educated  at 
Exeter  College,  Oxford;  and  graduated  in  1570, 
with  great  applause.  Three  years  after,  he  was 
made  chaplain  and  Fellow  of  Baliol  College  ;  and 
as  Anthony  Wood  says,  was  “  another  Apollos, 
mighty  in  the  Scriptures,” — also  “  a  solid  preach¬ 
er,  a  most  noted  disputant,  and  a  most  learned 
divine.”  He  was  made  Doctor  in  Divinity  in 
1584.  The  next  year,  when  Robert  Dudley,  the 
famous  Earl  of  Leicester,  was  sent  as  governor 
of  the  Netherlands,  then  just  emancipated  from 
the  Spanish  yoke,  Dr.  Holland  went  with  him  in 
the  capacity  of  chaplain.  In  1589,  he  succeeded 
the  celebrated  Dr.  Lawrence  Humphrey  as  the 
King’s  Professor  of  Divinity,  a  duty  for  which 
he  was  eminently  qualified,  and  in  which  he 


THOMAS  HOLLAND. 


135 


trained  up  many  distinguished  scholars.  He  was 
elected  Rector  of  Exeter  College  in  1592;  an 
office  he  filled  with  great  reputation  for  twenty 
years,  being  regarded  as  a  universal  scholar,  and 
a  prodigy  of  literature.  His  reputation  extended 
to  the  continent,  and  he  was  held  in  high  esteem 
in  the  universities  of  Europe.  These  were  the 
leading  events  in  his  studious  life. 

As  to  his  character,  he  was  a  man  of  ardent 
piety,  a  thorough  Calvinist  in  doctrine,  and  a  de¬ 
cided  non-conforming  Puritan  in  matters  of  cere¬ 
mony  and  church-discipline.  In  the  public  Uni¬ 
versity  debates,  he  staunchly  maintained  that 
“  bishops  are  not  a  distinct  order  from  presby¬ 
ters,  nor  at  all  superior  to  them  by  the  Word  of 
God.”  He  stoutly  resisted  the  popish  innova¬ 
tions  which  Bancroft  and  Laud  strove  too  suc¬ 
cessfully  to  introduce  at  Oxford.  When  the  exe¬ 
crable  Laud,  afterwards  the  odious  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury,  was  going  through  his  exercises 
as  candidate  for  the  degree  of  Bachelor  in  Divin¬ 
ity,  in  1604,  he  contended  “that  there  could  be 
no  true  churches  without  diocesan  episcopacy.” 
For  this,  the  young  aspirant  was  sharply  and  pub¬ 
licly  rebuked  by  Dr.  Holland,  who  presided  on 
the  occasion  ;  and  who  severely  reprehended  that 
future  Primate  of  all  England,  as  “  one  who 


136 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


sought  to  sow  discord  among  brethren,  and  be¬ 
tween  the  Church  of  England  and  the  Reformed 
Churches  abroad.” 

As  a  preacher,  Dr.  Holland  was  earnest  and 
solemn.  His  extemporary  discourses  were 
usually  better  that  his  more  elaborate  prepara¬ 
tions.  As  a  student,  it  was  said  of  him,  that  he 
was  so  “  immersed  in  books,”  that  this  propensity 
swallowed  up  almost  every  other.  In  the  trans¬ 
lation  of  our  Bible  he  took  a  very  prominent  part. 
This  was  the  crowning  work  of  his  life.  He 
died  March  16th,  1612,  a  few  months  after  this 
most  important  version  was  completed  and  pub¬ 
lished.  He  attained  to  the  age  of  seventy-three 
years. 

The  translation  being  finished,  he  spent  most 
of  his  time  in  meditation  and  prayer.  Sickness 
and  the  infirmities  of  age  quickened  into  greater 
life  his  desires  for  heaven.  In  the  hour  of  his 
departure  he  exclaimed, — “Come,  Oh  come,  Lord 
Jesus,  thou  bright  and  morning  star!  Come, 
Lord  Jesus;  I  desire  to  be  dissolved  and  be  with 
thee.”  He  was  buried  with  great  funeral  solem¬ 
nities  in  the  chancel  of  St.  Mary’s,  Oxford. 

One  of  his  intimate  associates  and  fellow-trans¬ 
lators,  Dr.  Kilby,  preached  his  funeral  sermon. 
In  this  sermon  it  is  said  of  him, — “  that  he 


THOMAS  HOLLAND. 


137 


had  a  wonderful  knowledge  of  all  the  learned 
languages,  and  of  all  arts  and  sciences,  both 
human  and  divine.  He  was  mighty  in  the  Scrip¬ 
tures  ;  and  so  familiarly  acquainted  with  the 
Fathers,  as  if  he  himself  had  been  one  of  them; 
and  so  versed  in  the  Schoolmen,  as  if  he  were 
the  Seraphic  Doctor.  He  was,  therefore,  most 
worthy  of  the  divinity-chair,  which  he  filled  about 
twenty  years,  with  distinguished  approbation  and 
applause.  He  was  so  celebrated  for  his  preach¬ 
ing,  reading,  disputing,  moderating,  and  all  other 
excellent  qualifications,  that  all  who  knew  him 
commended  him,  and  all  who  heard  of  him 
admired  him.”  In  illustration  of  his  zeal  for 
purity  in  faith  and  worship,  and  against  all  super¬ 
stition  and  idolatry,  the  same  sermon  informs  us, 
that,  whenever  he  took  a  journey,  he  first  called 
together  the  Fellows  of  his  College,  for  his  part¬ 
ing  charge,  which  always  ended  thus, — “I  com¬ 
mend  you  to  the  love  of  God,  and  to  the  hatred 
of  all  popery  and  superstition  !”*  He  published 
several  learned  orations  and  one  sermon.  He 
left  many  manuscripts  ready  for  the  press  ;  but 
as  they  fell  into  hands  unfriendly  to  the  Puritan¬ 
ism  they  contained,  they  were  never  published. 


*  Commendo  vos  dilectioni  Dei,  et  odio  papatus  et  superstitionis. 


138 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


RICHARD  KILBY. 

Among  those  grave  and  erudite  divines  to 
whom  all  the  generations  which  have1  read  the 
Bible  in  the  English  tongue  are  so  greatly  in¬ 
debted,  a  place  is  duly  assigned  to  Dr.  Richard 
Kilby.  He  was  a  native  of  Radcliff  on  the  river 
Wreak,  in  Liecestershire.  He  went  to  Oxford  ; 
and  when  he  had  been  at  the  University  three 
years,  was  chosen  Fellow  of  Lincoln  College,  in 
1577.  He  took  orders,  and  became  a  preacher 
of  note  in  the  University.  In  1590,  he  was  cho¬ 
sen  Rector  of  his  College,  and  made  Prebendary 
of  the  cathedral  church  of  Lincoln.  He  was  con¬ 
sidered  so  accurate  in  Hebrew  studies,  that  he 
was  appointed  the  King’s  Professor  in  that  branch 
of  literature.  Among  the  fruits  of  his  studies,  he 
left  a  commentary  on  Exodus,  chiefly  drawn  from 
the  writings  of  the  Rabbinical  interpreters.  He 
died  in  the  year  1620,  at  the  age  of  sixty. 

These  are  nearly  all  the  vestiges  remaining  of 
him.  There  is  one  incident,  however,  related  by 
“honest  Izaak  Walton,”  in  his  life  of  the  cele¬ 
brated  Bishop  Sanderson.  The  incident,  as  de¬ 
scribed  by  the  amiable  angler,  is  such  a  fine  his¬ 
torical  picture  of  the  times,  and  so  apposite  to  the 


RICHARD  KILBY. 


139 


purpose  of  this  little  volume,  that  it  must  be 
given  in  Walton’s  own  words. 

“  I  must  here  stop  my  reader,  and  tell  him 
that  this  Dr.  Kilby  was  a  man  of  so  great  learn¬ 
ing  and  wisdom,  and  so  excellent  a  critic  in  the 
Hebrew  tongue,  that  he  was  made  professor  of  it 
in  this  University  ;  and  was  also  so  perfect  a 
Grecian,  that  he  was  by  King  James  appointed 
to  be  one  of  the  translators  of  the  Bible  ;  and  that 
this  Doctor  and  Mr.  Sanderson  had  frequent  dis¬ 
courses,  and  loved  as  father  and  son.  The  Doc¬ 
tor  wTas  to  ride  a  journey  into  Derbyshire,  and 
took  Mr.  Sanderson  to  bear  him  company  ;  and 
they,  resting  on  a  Sunday  with  the  Doctor’s 
friend,  and  going  together  to  that  parish  church 
where  they  then  were,  found  the  young  preacher 
to  have  no  more  discretion,  than  to  waste  a  great 
part  of  the  hour  allotted  for  his  sermon  in  excep¬ 
tions  against  the  late  translation  of  several  words, 
(not  expecting  such  a  hearer  as  Dr.  Kilby,)  and 
shewed  three  reasons  why  a  particular  word 
should  have  been  otherwise  translated.  When 
evening  prayer  was  ended,  the  preacher  was  in¬ 
vited  to  the  Doctor’s  friend’s  house,  where,  aftei 
some  other  conference,  the  Doctor  told  him,  he 
might  have  preached  more  useful  doctrine,  and 
not  have  filled  his  auditors’  ears  with  needless 


1  40 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


exceptions  against  the  late  translation ;  and  for 
that  word  for  which  he  offered  to  that  poor  con¬ 
gregation  three  reasons  why  it  ought  to  have 
been  translated  as  he  said,  he  and  others  had 
considered  all  them,  and  found  thirteen  more 

considerable  reasons  why  it  was  translated  as 

•/ 

now  printed  ;  and  told  him,  ‘  If  his  friend,’  (then 
attending  him,)  ‘  should  prove  guilty  of  such  in¬ 
discretion,  he  should  forfeit  his  favor.’  To  which 
Mr.  Sanderson  said,  ‘  He  hoped  he  should  not.’ 
And  the  preacher  was  so  ingenuous  as  to  say, 
‘  He  would  not  justify  himself.’  And  so  I  return 
to  Oxford.” 

This  digression  of  honest  Izaac’s  pen  may 
serve  to  illustrate  the  magisterial  bearing  of  the 
“  heads  of  colleges,”  and  other  great  divines  of 
those  times;  and  also,  what  has  now  become  much 
rarer,  the  humility  and  submissiveness  of  the 
younger  brethren.  It  also  furnishes  an  incidental 
proof  of  the  considerate  and  patient  care  with 
which  our  venerable  Translators  studied  the  ver¬ 
bal  accuracy  of  their  work.  When  we  hear 
young  licentiates,  green  from  the  seminary,  dis¬ 
playing  their  smatterings  of  Hebrew  and  Greek 
by  cavilling  in  their  sermons  at  the  common  ver¬ 
sion,  and  pompously  telling  how  it  ought  to  have 
been  rendered,  we  cannot  but  wish  that  the  appa- 


MILES  SMITH. 


141 


rition  of  Dr.  Kilby’s  frowning  ghost  might  haunt 
them.  Doubtless  the  translation  is  susceptible  of 
improvement  in  certain  places  ;  but  this  is  not  a 
task  for  every  new-fledged  graduate  ;  nor  can  it 
be  very  often  attempted  without  shaking  the  con¬ 
fidence  of  the  common  people  in  our  unsurpassed 
version,  and  without  causing  “  the  trumpet  to  give 
an  uncertain  sound.’’ 


MILES  SMITH. 

This  person,  who  was  largely  occupied  in  the 
Bible  translation,  was  born  at  Hereford.  His  fa¬ 
ther  had  made  a  good  fortune  as  a  fletcher,  or 
maker  of  bows  and  arrows,  which  was  once  a 
prosperous  trade  in  “  merrie  England.’’  The  son 
was  entered  at  Corpus  Christi  College,  in  1568; 
but  afterwards  removed  to  Brazen  Nose  College, 
where  he  took  his  degrees,  and  “  proved  at  length 
an  incomparable  theologist.”  He  was  one  of  the 
chaplains  of  Christ’s  Church.  His  attainments 
were  very  great,  both  in  classical  and  oriental 
learning.  He  became  canon-residentiary  of  the 
cathedral  church  of  Hereford.  In  1594,  he  was 
created  Doctor  in  Divinity. 


142 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


He  had  a  four-fold  share  in  the  Translation. 
He  not  only  served  in  the  third  company,  but 
was  one  of  the  twelve  selected  to  revise  the  work, 
after  which  it  was  referred  to  the  final  examina¬ 
tion  of  Hr.  Smith  and  Bishop  Bilson.  Last  of  all, 
Hr.  Smith  was  employed  to  write  that  most 
learned  and  eloquent  preface,  which  is  become  so 
rare,  and  is  so  seldom  seen  by  readers  of  the  Bi¬ 
ble  ;  while  the  flattering  Hedication  to  the  King, 
which  is  of  no  particular  value,  has  been  often 
reprinted  in  editions  on  both  sides  of  the  Atlan¬ 
tic.  This  noble  Preface,  addressed  by  “  the 
Translators  to  the  Reader,”  in  the  first  edition, 
“stands  as  a  comely  gate .  to  a  glorious  city.” 
Let  the  reader  who  would  judge  for  himself,  whe¬ 
ther  our  Translators  were  masters  of  the  science 
of  sacred  criticism,  peruse  it,  and  be  satisfied. 

Hr.  Smith  never  sought  promotion,  being,  as 
he  pleasantly  said  of  himself,  “  covetous  of  no¬ 
thing  but  books.”*  But,  for  his  great  labor,  be¬ 
stowed  upon  the  best  of  books,  the  King,  in  the 
year  1612,  appointed  him  Bishop  of  Gloucester. 
In  this  office  he  behaved  with  the  utmost  meek¬ 
ness  and  benevolence.  He  died,  much  lamented, 


*  Nullius  rei  prseterquam  librorum  avidus. 


MILES  SMITH. 


143 


in  1624,  being  seventy  years  of  age,  and  was 
buried  in  his  own  cathedral. 

He  went  through  the  Greek  and  Latin  fathers, 
making  his  annotations  on  them  all.  He  was 
well  acquainted  with  the  Rabbinical  glosses  and 
comments.  So  expert  was  he  in  the  Chaldee, 
Syriac,  and  Arabic,  that  they  were  almost  as  fa¬ 
miliar  as  his  native  tongue.  “  Hebrew  he  had  at 
his  fingers’  ends.”  He  was  also  much  versed  in 
history  and  general  literature,  and  was  fitly  cha¬ 
racterized  by  a  brother  bishop  as  “  a  very  walk¬ 
ing  library.”  All  his  books  were  written  in  his 
own  hand,  and  in  most  elegant  penmanship. 

In  the  great  Bible-translation,  he  began  with 
the  first  of  the  laborers,  and  put  the  last  hand  to 
the  work.  Yet  he  was  never  known  to  speak  of 
it  as  owing  more  to  him  than  to  the  rest  of  the 
Translators.  We  may  sum  up  his  excellent  cha¬ 
racter  in  the  words  of  one  stiffly  opposed  to  his 
views  and  principles,  who  says, — “  He  was  a 
great  scholar,  yet  a  severe  Calvinist,  and  hated 
the  proceedings  of  Dr.  Laud  !” 


144 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


RICHARD  BRETT. 

This  reverend  clergyman  was  of  a  respectable 
family,  and  was  born  at  London,  in  1567.  He 
entered  at  Hart  Hall,  Oxford,  where  he  took  his 
first  degree.  He  was  then  elected  Fellow  of 
Lincoln  College,  wThere,  by  unwearied  industry, 
he  became  very  eminent  in  the  languages,  divin¬ 
ity,  and  other  branches  of  science.  Having  taken 
his  degrees  in  arts,  he  became,  in  1595,  Rector 
of  Quainton  in  Buckinghamshire,  in  which  bene¬ 
fice  he  spent  his  days.  He  was  made  Doctor  in 
Divinity  in  1605.  He  was  renowned  in  his  time 
for  vast  attainments,  as  w7ell  as  revered  for  his 
piety.  “He  wras  skilled  and  versed  to  a  criti¬ 
cism  ”  in  the  Latin,  Greek,  Hebrew,  Chaldee, - 
Arabic,  and  Ethiopic  tongues.  He  published  a 
number  of  erudite  works,  all  in  Latin.  It  is  re¬ 
corded  of  him,  that  “  he  was  a  most  vigilant 
pastor,  a  diligent  preacher  of  God’s  word,  a 
liberal  benefactor  to  the  poor,  a  faithful  friend, 
and  a  good  neighbor.”  This  studious  and  exem¬ 
plary  minister,  having  attained  this  exalted  repu¬ 
tation,  died  in  1637,  at  the  age  of  seventy,  and 
lies  buried  in  the  chancel  of  Quainton  Church, 
where  he  had  dispensed  the  word  and  ordinances 
for  three  and  forty  years. 


MR.  FAIRCLOUGH. 


145 


MR.  FAIRCLOUGH. 

The  author  has  bestowed  great  labor  in  endea 
voring  to  identify  this  person.  After  exhausting 
all  the  means  of  information  within  his  reach,  he 
is  led  to  the  belief,  that  the  last  on  the  list  of  this 
company  of  Translators,  who  is  designated  simply 
as  “Mr.  Fairclough,”  is  Daniel  Fairclough,  other¬ 
wise  known  as  Dr.  Daniel  Featley;  which,  strange 
to  say,  is  a  corrupt  pronunciation  of  the  name 
Fairclough.  This  is  distinctly  asserted  by  his 
nephew,  Dr.  John  Featley,  who  wrote  a  life  of  his 
uncle,  and  printed  it  at  the  end  of  a  book,  enti¬ 
tled  “Dr.  Daniel  Featley  revived.”  The  nephew 
states,  that  his  uncle  was  ordained  deacon  and 
priest  under  the  name  Fairclough.  The  main 
ground  for  questioning  the  identity,  is  the  age  of 
Daniel  Fairclough,  who,  when  the  Bible-trans- 
lators  were  nominated,  was  only  some  twenty-six 
years  old,  which  is  considerably  less  than  the 
age  of  most  of  his  associates.  He  was,  however, 
an  early  ripe,  and  a  distinguished  scholar;  and 
comparatively  young  as  he  was,  it  devolved  on 
him  to  preach  at  the  funeral  of  the  great  Dr. 

Reynolds,  who  died  during  the  progress  of  the 

♦ 

work.  This  funeral  service  was  performed  with 

much  applause,  at  only  four  days’  notice, 

7 


146 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


The  birth-place  of  Daniel  Fairclough,  or 
Featley,  to  call  him  by  the  name  whereby  he  is 
chiefly  known,  was  Charlton,  in  Oxfordshire, 
where  he  was  born  about  the  year  1578.  Fie 
was  admitted  to  Corpus  Christi  College  in  1594  ; 
and  wTas  elected  Fellow^  in  1602.  He  stood 
in  such  high  estimation,  that  Sir  Thomas  Ed- 
wrnrds,  ambassador  to  France,  took  him  to  Paris 
as  his  chaplain,  where  he  spent  two  or  three 
years  in  the  ambassador’s  house.  Here  he  held 
many  “tough  disputes”  with  the  doctors  of  the 
Sorbonne,  and  other  papists.  His  opponents 
termed  him  “  the  keen  and  cutting  Featley  and 
found  him  a  match  in  their  boasted  l6gic  ; 

“  For  he  a  rope  of  sand  could  twist, 

As  tough  as  learned  Sorbonnist.” 

On  returning  to  England,  he  repaired  to  his 
College,  where  he  remained  till  1613,  when  he 
became  Rector  of  Northill,  in  Cornwall.  Soon 
after,  he  was  appointed  chaplain  to  Dr.  Abbot, 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  also  one  of  the  Trans¬ 
lators,  by  wThom  he  was  made  Rector  of  Lam¬ 
beth,  in  Surrey.  In  1617,  he  held  a  famous  de¬ 
bate  with  Dr.  Prideaux,  the  King’s  Professor  of 
Divinity  at  Oxford.  About  this  time,  the  Arch¬ 
bishop  gave  him  the  rectory  of  Allhallows 


MR.  FAIRCLOUGH. 


147 


Church,  Bread  Street,  London.  This  he  soon 
exchanged  for  the  rectory  of  Acton,  in  Middlesex. 
He  was  also  Provost  of  Chelsea  College  ;  and,  at 
one  time,  chaplain  in  ordinary  to  King  Charles 
the  First. 

Being  puritanically  inclined,  Dr.  Featley  was 
appointed,  in  1643,  to  be  one  of  the  Assembly  of 
Divines  at  Westminster.  As  he  was  not  one 
of  the  “  root  and  branch  ”  party,  who  were  for 
wholly  changing  the  order  of  government,  he 
soon  fell  under  the  displeasure  of  the  Long  Par¬ 
liament.  Some  of  his  correspondence  with  Arch¬ 
bishop  Usher,  who  was  then  with  the  King  at 
Oxford,  was  intercepted.  In  this  correspondence, 
he  expressed  his  scruples  about  taking  the  “  sol¬ 
emn  league  and  covenant and  for  this,  was 
unjustly  suspected  of  being  a  spy.  He  was  cast 
into  prison,  and  his  rectories  were  taken  from 
him.  The  next  year,  on  account  of  his  failing 
health,  he  was  removed,  agreeably  to  his  petition, 
to  Chelsea  College.  There,  after  a  few  months 
spent  in  holy  exercises,  he  expired,  April  17th, 
1645.  “Though  he  was  small  of  stature,  yet  he 
had  a  great  soul,  and  had  all  learning  compacted 
in  him.”  He  published  some  forty  books  and 
treatises,  and  left  a  great  many  manuscripts. 
His  other  labors  have  passed  away;  “but  the 


148 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


word  of  the  Lord,”  which,  as  it  is  believed,  he 
aided  in  giving  to  unborn  millions,  “  abideth  for 
ever.” 


The  fourth  company  of  these  famous  scholars 
was  composed  of  Oxford  divines  ;  and  to  them, 
as  their  portion  of  the  work,  were  assigned  the 
four  Gospels,  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  and  the 
Revelation  of  St.  John  the  Divine. 


THOMAS  HA  VIS. 

This  person,  the  president  of  his  company,  was 
born  of  worthy  parentage,  at  Malden,  in  the 
County  of  Surrey.  He  was  bred  at  Westminster 
School ;  and  then  entered,  in  1575,  as  student 
of  Christ’s  Church,  one  of  the  Oxford  colleges. 
As  it  is  a  matter  of  some  interest,  shewing  that 
he  went  through  an  extensive  course  of  study, 
the  dates  of  his  various  degrees  will  be  given. 
In  1578,  he  graduated  as  Bachelor  of  Arts  ;  in 
1581,  he  proceeded  as  Master  of  Arts  ;  in  1589, 
he  became  Bachelor  in  Divinity  ;  and  in  1595, 


THOMAS  RAVIS. 


149 


he  was  made  Doctor  in  Divinity.  The  succes¬ 
sive  degrees  of  the  greater  part  of  the  persons 
belonging  to  the  list  of  Translators  could  be  giv¬ 
en  ;  but  are  omitted  for  the  sake  of  brevity.  It 
is  enough  to  record,  that  they  nearly  all  attained 
to  the  highest  literary  honors  of  their  respective 
universities. 

Dr.  Ravis,  in  1591,  was  appointed  rector  of 
the  Church  of  All-hallows,  Barking,  in  London. 
The  next  year,  he  became  Canon  of  Westminster, 
and  occupied  the  seventh  stall  in  that  church. 
Two  years  later,  he  was  chosen  Dean  of  Christ’s 
Church  College.  He  was  also,  in  1596  and  the 
year  following,  elected  Vice-Chancellor  of  the 
University.  In  1598,  he  exchanged  his  benefice 
at  All-hallows  Church  for  the  rectory  of  Islip. 
He  also  held  the  Wittenham  Abbey  Church,  in 
Berkshire.  All  these  preferments  and  profitable 
livings  mark  him  as  a  rising  man.  His  holding 
a  plurality  of  churches  for  the  sake  of  their  reve¬ 
nues,  in  neither  of  which  he  could  perform  the 
duties  of  the  pastoral  office,  was  one  of  the  cases 
that  justified  the  complaint  of  Lord  Chancellor 
Ellesmere,  at  the  Conference  in  Hampton  Court. 
His  lordship  complained  of  this  practice,  as  occa¬ 
sioning  many  learned  men  at  the  universities  to 
pine  for  want  of  places,  while  others  had  more 


150 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


than  they  could  fill.  “  I  wish,  therefore,”  said 
he,  “that  some  may  have  single  coats,  or  one 
living,  before  others  have  doublets,  or  plurali¬ 
ties.”  To  this,  the  frugal  Bancroft,  then  Bishop 
of  London,  who  kept  his  own  ribs  thoroughly 
warmed  with  such  investitures,  made  the  thrifty 
reply, — “  But  a  doublet  is  necessary  in  cold  wea¬ 
ther  !”  This  prelate,  a  fierce  persecutor  of  the 
Puritans,  was  reputed  to  have  manifested  very 
little  “  saving  grace,”  except  in  the  way  of  penu¬ 
rious  hoardings.  The  graceless  wags  of  his  day 
made  this  epitaph  upon  him  ; 

“  Here  lies  his  Grace,  in  cold  clay  clad, 

Who  died  for  want  of  what  he  had !” 

The  pernicious  custom  of  pluralities,  whereby 
a  man  receives  tithes  for  the  care  of  souls  of 
which  he  takes  no  care,  fleecing  the  flock  he 
neither  wTatches  nor  feeds,  is  one  of  those  abuses 
still  continued  in  the  Church  of  England,  and 
calling  for  thorough  reform. 

In  1604,  soon  after  Dr.  Ravis  was  commissioned 
as  one  of  the  Bible-translators,  the  Lords  of  the 
Council  requested  his  acceptance  of  the  bishopric 
of  Gloucester,  for  which  there  were  very  many 
eager  suitors.  Three  years  later,  he  was  trans¬ 
lated  to  the  bishopric  of  London.  Anthony  Wood 


TIIOMAS  RAVIS. 


151 


says,  that  he  was  first  preferred  to  the  see  of 
Gloucester,  which  he  reluctantly  accepted,  on 
account  of  his  great  learning,  gravity,  and  pru¬ 
dence  ;  and  that  though  his  diocese  “was  pretty 
well  stocked  with  those  who  could  not  bear  the 
name  of  a  bishop,  yet,  by  his  episcopal  living 
among  them,  he  obtained  their  love,  and  a  good 
report  from  them.”  If  he  deserved  this  commen¬ 
dation  while  at  Gloucester,  he  changed  for  the 
worse  on  his  translation  to  London,  where  he  not 
only  succeeded  the  bitter  Bancroft  in  his  office, 
but  also  in  his  severe  and  exacting  behavior.  So 
true  is  the  remark,  that  “bishops  and  books  are 
seldom  the  better  for  being  translated .”  No 
sooner  had  he  taken  his  seat  in  London,  than  he 
stretched  forth  his  hand  to  vex  the  non-conform¬ 
ing  Puritans.  Among  others,  he  cited  before  him 
that  holy  and  blessed  man,  Richard  Rogers,  for 
nearly  fifty  years  the  faithful  minister  of  Wea- 
thersfield.  than  whom,  it  is  said,  “  the  Lord  hon¬ 
ored  none  more  in  the  conversion  of  souls.”  In 
the  presence  of  this  venerable  man,  who,  for  his 
close  walking  with  God,  was  styled  the  Enoch  o t 
his  day,  Bishop  Ravis  protested, — “  By  the  lief) 
of  Jesus,  I  will  not  leave  one  preacher  in  my 
diocese,  who  doth  not  subscribe  and  conform.” 
The  poor  prelate  was  doomed  to  be  disappointed  ; 


152 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED 


as  he  died,  before  his  task  was  well  begun,  on 
on  the  14th  of  December,  1609.  On  account  of 
his  high  offices,  and  his  dying  before  the  transla¬ 
tion  was  completed,  it  is  not  probable  that  he 
took  so  active  a  part  in  that  business  as  some  of 
his  colleagues.  Though  too  much  carried  away 
by  a  zeal  for  the  forms  of  his  Church,  which  was 
neither  according  to  knowledge  nor  charity,  he 
lived  and  died  in  deserved  respect,  and  hath  a 
fair  monument  still  standing  in  his  cathedral  of 
St.  Paul’s. 


GEOEGE  ABBOT. 

This  distinguished  ecclesiastic  was  a  native  of 
Guildford,  in  Surrey.  He  was  the  son  of  pious 
parents,  wffio  had  been  sufferers  for  the  truth  in 
the  times  of  popish  cruelty.  He  was  born 
October  29th,  1562.  At  the  age  of  fourteen,  he 
was  entered  as  a  student  of  Baliol  College,  Ox¬ 
ford  ;  and  in  1583,  he  was  chosen  to  a  fellowship. 
In  1585,  he  took  orders,  and  became  a  popular 
preacher  in  the  University.  He  wTas  created 
Doctor  of  Divinity,  in  1597  ;  and  a  few  months 
after,  was  elected  Master  of  University  College. 
At  this  time  began  his  conflicts  wdth  William 


GEORGE  ABBOT. 


153 


Laud,  which  lasted  with  great  severity  as  long  as 
Abbot  lived.  Dr.  Abbot  was  a  Calvinist  and  a 
moderate  Churchman  ;  while  Dr.  Laud  was  an 
Arminian,  and  might  have  been  a  cardinal  at 
Rome,  if  he  had  not  preferred  to  be  a  pope 
at  Canterbury. 

In  1598,  Dr.  Abbot  published  a  Latin  work, 
which  was  reprinted  in  Germany.  The  next  year 
he  was  installed  Dean  of  Winchester.  In  1600, 
he  was  elected  Vice-Chancellor  of  the  Universi 
ty  ;  and  was  re-elected  to  the  same  honorable 
post  in  1603  and  1605.  It  was  about  this  time, 
that  he  was  put  into  the  royal  commission  for 
translating  the  Bible. 

Dr.  Abbot  went  to  Scotland,  in  1608,  as  chap¬ 
lain  to  the  Earl  of  Dunbar  ;  and  while  there,  by 
his  prudent  and  temperate  measures,  succeeded 
in  establishing  a  moderate  or  qualified  episcopacy 
in  that  kingdom.  This  was  a  matter  which  King 
James  had  so  much  at  heart,  that  he  ever  after 
held  Dr.  Abbot  in  great  favor,  and  rapidly  hur¬ 
ried  him  into  the  highest  ecclesiastical  dignities 
and  preferments.  He  was  made  Bishop  of  Litch¬ 
field  and  Coventry  on  the  3d  of  December,  1609; 
and  then,  in  less  than  two  months,  was  translated 
to  the  see  of  London.  In  less  than  fifteen  months 
more,  he  was  made  Archbishop  of  Canterbury, 


154 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


and  Primate  of  all  England.  Thus  he  was  twice 
translated  himself,  before  he  saw  the  Bible  trans¬ 
lated  once.  Though  an  excellent  preacher,  he 
had  never  exercised  himself  in  the  pastoral  office, 
rising  at  one  stride  from  being  a  University -lec¬ 
turer  to  the  chief  dignities  of  the  Church. 

When  he  reached  the  primacy,  he  was  forty- 
nine  years  of  age  ;  and  was  held  in  the  highest 
esteem  both  by  the  prince  and  the  people.  In  all 
great  transactions,  whether  in  church  or  state,  he 
bore  a  principal  part.  And  yet,  at  times,  he 
showed,  in  matters  which  touch  the  conscience,  a 
degree  of  independence  of  the  royal  will,  such  as 
must  have  been  very  distasteful  to  the  domineer¬ 
ing  temper  of  James,  and  very  unusual  in  that 
age  of  passive  obedience,  and  servile  cringing  to 
the  dictates  of  royalty.  Thus  it  was,  when  the 
King,  under  the  pretence  that  the  strict  observ¬ 
ance  of  the  Sabbath,  as  practiced  by  Protestants, 
was  likely  to  prejudice  the  Romanists,  and  hinder 
their  conversion,  issued  his  infamous  “  Book  of 
Sports.”  This  was  a  Declaration  intended  to  en¬ 
courage,  at  the  close  of  public  worship,  various 
recreations,  such  as  “promiscuous  dancing,  ar¬ 
chery,  leaping,  vaulting,  May-games,  Whitsun- 
ales,  or  morrice-dances,  setting  up  of  May-poles, 
or  other  sports  therewith  used.”  This  abomina- 


GEORGE  ABBOT. 


155 


ble  edict  was  required  to  be  read  by  all  ministers 
in  their  parish-churches.  Its  promulgation  great¬ 
ly  troubled  the  more  conscientious  of  the  clergy, 
who  expected  to  be  brought  into  difficulty  by 
their  refusal  to  publish  the  shameful  document. 
Archbishop  Abbot  warmly  opposed  its  enforce¬ 
ment,  and  forbade  it  to  be  read  in  the  church  of 
Croydon,  where  he  was  at  the  time  of  its  publica¬ 
tion.  The  opposition  wTas  too  much,  even  for  the 
ruthless  king  ;  and  he,  at  last,  gave  up  his  im¬ 
pious  attempt  to  heathenize  the  Lord’s  Day. 

It  was  in  1619,  that  the  Archbishop  founded 
his  celebrated  hospital  at  Guildford,  the  place  of 
his  nativity,  and  nobly  endowed  it  from  his  pri¬ 
vate  property.  In  that  same  year,  a  sad  mis¬ 
chance  befel  him.  His  health  being  much  im¬ 
paired,  he  had  recourse  to  hunting,  by  medical 
advice,  as  a  means  of  restoring  it.  This  sort  of 
exercise  has  never  been  in  very  good  repute 
among  ecclesiastics.  Jerome  recognizes  some 
worthy  fishermen  who  followed  the  sacred  call¬ 
ing  ;  but  says,  that  “we  no  where  read  in  Scrip¬ 
ture  of  a  holy  hunter.”  While  his  Grace  of  Can¬ 
terbury  was  pursuing  the  chase  in  Bramshiii 
Park,  a  seat  of  the  Earl  of  Ashby  de  la  Zouch, 
an  arrow  from  his  cross-bow,  aimed  at  a  deer, 
glanced  from  a  tree,  and  killed  a  game-keeper,  an 


156 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


imprudent  man,  who  had  been  cautioned  to  keep 
out  of  the  way.  This  casual  homicide  was  the 
cause  of  great  affliction  to  the  prelate.  During 
the  rest  of  his  life,  he  observed  a  monthly  fast,  on 
a  Tuesday,  the  day  of  the  mishap.  He  also  set¬ 
tled  a  liberal  annuity  upon  the  poor  game-keep¬ 
er’s  widow,  which  annuity  was  attended  with  the 
additional  consolation,  that  it  soon  procured  her 
a  better  husband  than  the  man  she  had  lost.  For 
the  Primate,  however,  who  wTas  ever  a  celibate, 
there  was  no  such  remedy  of  grief,  and  all  the 
rest  of  his  life  was  overcast  with  gloom.  This 
business  subjected  him  to  many  hard  shots  from 
them  that  liked  him  not.  Once  returning  to 
Croydon,  after  a  long  absence,  a  great  many  wo¬ 
men,  from  curiosity,  gathered  about  his  coach. 
The  Archbishop,  who  hated  to  be  stared  at,  and 
was  never  fond  of  females,  exclaimed  somewhat 
churlishly,  “  What  make  these  women  here  !” 
Upon  this  an  old  crone  cried  out, — “  You  had  best 
to  shoot  an  arrow  at  us  !”  It  is  said  that  this 
tongue-shot,  which  often  goes  deeper  than  gun¬ 
shot,  wTent  to  his  very  heart. 

His  enemies  made  a  strong  handle  of  this  acci¬ 
dental  homicide.  It  was  insisted,  that  the  canon- 
law  allows  no  “man  of  blood”  to  be  a  builder 
of  the  spiritual  temple  ;  and  that  the  Primate 


GEORGE  ABBOT. 


157 


who  had  retreated  after  the  accident  to  his  hos¬ 
pital  at  Guildford,  was  disenabled  from  his  cleri¬ 
cal  functions.  The  King  appointed  a  commission 
to  try  the  question,  Whether  the  Archbishop  was 
disqualified  for  his  official  duties  by  this  involun¬ 
tary  homicide  ?  After  long  debate,  in  which  the 
divines  on  the  continent  took  part,  it  was  the 
general  decision,  that  the  fact  did  disqualify. 
Nevertheless,  King  James,  in  his  usurped  char¬ 
acter  as  supreme  head  of  the  English  Church,  an 
office  which  rightly  belongs  only  to  the  King  of 
kings,  issued,  in  1621,  a  full  pardon  and  dis¬ 
pensation  to  the  humbled  Primate.  Still,  several 
newly-appointed  bishops,  who  had  been  awaiting 
consecration,  and  among  them  Dr.  William  Laud, 
then  bishop  elect  of  St.  David’s,  refused  to  re¬ 
ceive  it  from  his  hands,  and  obtained  the  myste¬ 
rious  virtues  of  “  episcopal  grace  ”  from  other 
administration.  Others,  however,  as  Dr.  Dave- 
nant,  bishop  elect  of  Salisbury,  and  Dr.  Hall, 
bishop  elect  of  Norwich,  were  solemnly  conse¬ 
crated  by  their  dejected  metropolitan. 

All  this  did  not  discourage  Archbishop  Abbot 
from  making  vigorous  opposition,  in  the  following 
year,  to  the  proposed  match  between  Charles, 
Prince  of  Wales,  and  the  Infanta,  or  Princess 
Royal,  of  Spain.  Though  this  foolish,  unpopu 


158 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


lar,  and  unsuccessful  scheme  was  a  favorite  piece 
of  policy  with  the  King,  who  was  quite  unused 
to  be  thwarted  by  his  courtiers,  Dr.  Abbot  con¬ 
tinued  to  enjoy  his  confidence  till  the  King’s 
death  in  1625. 

When  Charles  the  First  succeeded  to  the 
throne,  he  was  crowned  and  anointed  by  the 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury.  Nevertheless,  the 
latter  soon  found  himself  in  deep  eclipse.  His 
inveterate  foe,  the  resolute  Dr.  Laud,  then  Bishop 
of  Bath  and  Wells,  came  between,  and  intercept¬ 
ed  the  sunshine  of  royal  favor.  The  matter  of 
the  fortuitous  homicide  seems  to  have  been  re¬ 
vived  against  him,  as  ground  for  his  sequestra¬ 
tion.  Charles  required  him  to  live  in  retirement, 
which  he  did  at  Ford ;  and  in  1627,  appointed  a 
commision  of  five  prelates,  to  suspend  him  from 
the  exercise  of  his  archiepiscopal  functions. 
These  prelates  were  Dr.  Mountaigne,  Bishop  of 
London  ;  Dr.  Neile,  Bishop  of  Durham  ;  Dr. 
Howson,  Bishop  of  Oxford  ;  and  Dr.  Laud,  Bish¬ 
op  of  Bath  and  Wells.  When  the  instrument 
for  the  Archbishop’s  suspension  was  drawn  up 
for  their  signature,  the  four  senior  bishops  de¬ 
clined  to  set  their  hands  thereto,  and  appeared  to 
manifest  much  reluctance  and  regret.  “  Then 
give  me  the  pen!”  said  Bishop  Laud;  and 


GEORGE  ABBOT. 


159 


“  though  last  in  place,  first  subscribed  his  name.” 
The  others,  after  some  demur,  were  induced  to 
follow  his  example.  From  that  time,  it  is  said, 
the  Archbishop  w*as  never  known  to  laugh  ;  and 
became  quite  dead  to  the  world. 

Next  year,  however,  the  fickle  king  saw  fit  to 
alter  his  course  ;  and,  about  Christmas  time,  re¬ 
stored  Dr,  Abbot  to  his  liberty  and  jurisdiction. 
He  was  sent  for  to  Court  ;  received,  as  he  stepped 
out  of  his  barge,  by  the  Archbishop  of  York  and 
the  Earl  of  Dorset,  and  by  them  conducted  into 
the  royal  presence.  The  king  gave  him  his  hand 
to  kiss,  and  charged  him  not  to  fail  of  attendance 
at  the  Council-table  twice  a  week.  He  sat  in  the 
House  of  Peers,  and  continued  in  his  spiritual 
functions  without  further  interruption  till  his 
death  some  five  years  after,  when  he  was  suc¬ 
ceeded  in  his  see  by  his  implacable  and  ill-starred 
rival,  William  Laud. 

Dr.  Abbot’s  brief  sequestration  had  made  him 
popular  in  the  country,  and  his  restoration  was 
probably  owing  to  a  desire  to  conciliate  his  influ¬ 
ence  in  the  parliament,  with  which  the  king  was 
already  in  trouble.  The  Archbishop  rather  coun¬ 
tenanced  the  liberal  party,  and  stiffly  resisted  the 
slavish  tenet  of  Dr.  Mainwaring,  which  raised 
such  an  excitement.  This  divine  had  publicly 


160 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


maintained,  as  was  supposed  with  the  royal  ap¬ 
probation,  “  that  the  King’s  royal  will  and  com¬ 
mand,  in  imposing  laws,  taxes,  and  other  aids, 
upon  his  people,  without  common  consent  in  par¬ 
liament,  did  so  far  bind  the  consciences  of  the 
subjects  of  this  kingdom,  that  they  could  not  re¬ 
fuse  the  same  without  peril  of  eternal  damna¬ 
tion.”  Here  was  the  “  divine  right  of  kings  ” 
with  a  vengeance  ! 

Dr.  George  Abbot  continued  in  office  during 
those  troublous  times  which  preceded  the  civil 
wars,  till  he  died,  at  his  palace  of  Croydon,  on 
Sunday,  August  4th,  1633,  at  the  age  of  seven¬ 
ty-one,  quite  worn  out  with  cares  and  infirmities. 

He  was  a  very  grave  man,  and  of  a  very 
“  fatherly  presence,”  and  unimpeachable  in  his 
morals.  He  was  a  firm  Calvinist,  and  a  thorough 
Church-of-England-man.  He  was  somewhat  in¬ 
dulgent  to  the  more  moderate  Puritans  ;  but  the 
more  zealous  of  them  accused  him  sharply  of  be¬ 
ing  a  persecutor,  while  the  high-toned  church¬ 
men  vehemently  charged  him  with  disloyalty  to 
their  cause.  It  is  also  said,  that  as  he  had  never 
exercised  the  pastoral  care,  but  was  “  made  a 
shepherd  of  shepherds,  before  he  had  been  a 
shepherd  of  sheep,”  he  was  wanting  in  sympathy 
with  the  troubles  and  infirmities  of  ministers. 


GEORGE  ABBOT. 


161 


He  was  severe  in  his  proceedings  against  clerical 
delinquents  ;  but  he  protested  that  he  did  this  to 
shield  them  from  the  greater  severity  of  the  lay 
judges,  who  would  visit  them  with  heavier  pun¬ 
ishments,  to  the  greater  shame  of  themselves  and 
their  profession.  He  was,  in  truth,  stern  and 
melancholy.  As  compared  with  his  brother, 
Robert  Abbot,  the  Bishop  of  Salisbury,  it  was 
said,  that  “gravity  did  frown  in  George,  and 
smile  in  Robert.”  The  other  brother  of  these 
bishops  was  Lord  Mayor  of  London. 

The  Archbishop  was  regarded  as  an  excellent 
preacher  and  a  great  divine.  Anthony  Wood 
speaks  of  him  as  a  “learned  man,  having  his 

t 

learning  all  of  t-he  old  stamp,” — that  is  to  say, 
vast  and  ponderous.  He  published  lectures  on 
the  book  of  Jonah,  and  numerous  treatises,  most¬ 
ly  relating  to  the  political  and  religious  occurren- 
ces  of  the  times.  But  to  have  borne  an  active 
part  in  the  preparation  of  the  most  useful  and 
important  of  all  the  translations  of  the  Bible,  is 
an  honor  far  beyond  the  chief  ecclesiastical  dig 
nities  and  the  highest  literary  fame. 


162 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


RICHARD  EEDES. 

Dr.  Eedes  was  a  native  of  Bedfordshire,  born 
at  Sewell,  about  the  year  1555.  At  an  early  age 
he  was  sent  to  Westminster  school.  He  became 
a  student  of  Christ’s  Church,  in  Oxford,  in  1571. 
He  subsequently  took  his  two  degrees  in  arts, 
and  two  more  in  divinity.  In  1578,  he  be¬ 
came  a  preacher,  and  arose  to  considerable 
eminence.  In  1584,  he  was  made  Prebenda¬ 
ry  of  Yarminster,  in  the  cathedral  church 
of  Salisbury  ;  and  two  years  later,  became 
Canon  of  Christ’s  Church,  and  chaplain  to 
Queen  Elizabeth.  In  1596,  he  was  Dean  of 
Worcester,  which  was  the  highest  ecclesiastical 
preferment  he  attained.  He  was  chaplain  to 
James  I.,  as  he  had  been  to  the  illustrious  queen 
who  preceded  him ;  and  was  much  admired  at 
court  as  an  accomplished  pulpit  orator.  In  his 
younger  days,  he  was  given,  like  some  other 
fashionable  clergymen,  to  writing  poetry  and 
plays  ;  but,  in  riper  years,  he  became,  as  the  an¬ 
tiquarian  of  Oxford  says,  “  a  pious  and  grave 
divine,  an  ornament  to  his  profession,  and  grace 
to  the  pulpit.”  He  published  several  discourses 
at  different  times.  Dr.  Eedes  died  at  Worcester, 
November  19th,  1604,  soon  after  his  appointment 
to  be  one  of  the  Bible-translators,  and  before  the 


GILES  TOMSON. 


163 


work  w~as  well  begun,  so  that  another  was  ap¬ 
pointed  in  his  place.  But  let  him  not  be  deprived 
of  his  just  commendation,  as  one  who  was  count¬ 
ed  worthy  of  being  joined  with  that  ablest  band 
of  scholars  and  divines,  which  was  ever  united 
in  a  single  literary  undertaking. 


GILES  TOMSON. 

This  good  man  was  a  native  of  “  famous  Lon¬ 
don  town.”  In  1571,  he  entered  University  Col¬ 
lege,  Oxford  ;  and,  in  1580,  was  elected  Fellow 
of  All  Souls’  College.  A  few  years  later,  he  was 
out  in  a  shower  of  appointments,  “  with  his  dish 
right  side  up.”  He  was,  at  that  lucky  season, 
made  divinity  lecturer  in  Magdalen  College  ; 
chaplain  to  Queen  Elizabeth,  as  was  his  friend, 
Dr.  Richard  Eedes  ;  Prebendary  of  Repington; 
Canon  residentiary  of  Hereford  ;  and  Rector  of 
Pembridge  in  Herefordshire.  Pie  was  a  most 
eminent  preacher.  He  became  Doctor  in  Divin¬ 
ity  in  1602  ;  and  was,  in  that  year,  appointed 
Dean  of  Windsor.  In  virtue  of  this  latter  office, 
he  acted  as  Registrar  of  the  most  noble  Order  of 
the  Garter. 

Dr.  Tomson  took  a  great  deal  of  pains  in  his 


164 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


part  of  the  translation  of  the  Bible,  which  he  did 
not  long  survive.  He  was  consecrated  Bishop  of 
Gloucester,  June  9th,  1611;  and  a  year  after, 
June  14th,  1612,  he  died,  at  the  age  of  fifty-nine, 
“  to  the  great  grief  of  all  who  knew  the  piety  and 
learning  of  the  man.”  Man  is  like  the  flower, 
whose  full  bloom  is  the  signal  for  decay  to  begin. 
It  is  singular  that  Bishop  Tomson  never  visited 
Gloucester,  after  his  election  to  that  see. 


HENRY  SAYILE. 

Some  have  doubted  whether  the  “  Mr.  Savile,” 
on  the  list  of  Translators,  was  the  renowned 
scholar  afterwards  known  as  Sir  Henry  Savile 
But  the  matter  is  put  beyond  doubt  by  Anthony 
Wood  and  others.  Savile  was  born  at  Bradley, 
in  Yorkshire,  November  30th,  1549,  “  of  an¬ 
cient  and  worshipful  extraction.”  He  gradu¬ 
ated  at  Brazen  Nose  College,  Oxford  ;  but  after¬ 
wards  became  a  Fellow  of  Merton  College.  In 
1570,  he  read  his  ordinaries  on  the  Almagest  of 
Ptolemy,  a  collection  of  the  geometrical  and  as¬ 
tronomical  observations  and  problems  of  the  an¬ 
cients.  By  this  exercise  he  very  early  became 


HENRY  SAVILE.  165 

famous  for  his  Greek  and  mathematical  learning-. 
In  this  latter  science,  he  for  some  time  read  vol¬ 
untary  lectures. 

In  his  twenty-ninth  year,  he  travelled  in 

♦ 

France  and  elsewhere,  to  perfect  himself  in 
literature  ;  and  returned  highly  accomplished  in 
learning,  languages,  and  knowledge  of  the  world 
and  men.  He  then  became  tutor  in  Greek  and 
mathematics  to  Queen  Elizabeth,  whose  father, 
Henry  VIII.,  is  said  by  Southey  to  have  set  the 
example  of  giving  to  daughters  a  learned  ed¬ 
ucation.  It  is  to  her  highest  honor,  that  when 
she  had  been  more  than  twenty  years  upon  the 
throne,  she  still  kept  up  her  habits  of  study,  as 
appears  by  this  appointment  of  Mr.  Savile 

In  1686,  he  was  made  Warden  of  Merton  Col¬ 
lege,  which  office  he  filled  with  great  credit  for 
six  and  thirty  years,  and  also  to  the  great  pros¬ 
perity  of  the  institution.  Ten  years  later,  he 
added  to  this  office,  that  of  Provost  of  Eton  Col¬ 
lege,  which  school  rapidly  increased  in  reputa¬ 
tion  under  him.  “  Thus,”  as  Fuller  says,  “  this 
skilful  gardener  had,  at  the  same  time,  a  nursery 
of  young  plants,  and  an  orchard  of  grown  trees, 
both  flourishing  under  his  careful  inspection.” 
He  was  no  admirer  of  geniuses  ;  but  preferred 
diligence  to  wit.  “  Give  me,”  he  used  to  say. 


166 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED 


“  the  plodding  student.  If  I  would  look  for  wits, 
I  would  go  to  Newgate  ; — there  be  the  wits  !” 
As  might  be  expected,  he  was  somewhat  unpopu¬ 
lar  with  his  scholars,  on  account  of  the  severity 
with  which  he  urged  them  to  diligence. 

Soon  after  his  nomination  as  one  of  the  Trans¬ 
lators,  having  declined  all  offers  of  other  promo¬ 
tion,  whether  civil  or  ecclesiastical,  he  was 
knighted  by  the  King.  About  the  same  time, 
he  buried  his  only  son  Henry,  at  the  age  of  eight 
years.  In  consequence  of  this  bereavement,  he 
devoted  most  of  his  wealth  to  the  promotion  of 
learning.  He  translated  the  Histories  of  Corne¬ 
lius  Tacitus,  and  published  the  same  with  notes. 
He  also  published,  from  the  manuscripts,  the 
writings  of  Bradwardin  against  Pelagius  ;  the 
Writers  of  English  history  subsequent  to  Bede  ; 
Prelections  on  the  Elements  of  Euclid  ;  and  other 
learned  works  in  English  and  Latin. 

He  is  chiefly  known,  however,  by  being  the 
first  to  edit  the  complete  works  of  John  Chrysos¬ 
tom,  the  most  famous  of  the  Greek  Fathers.  He 
spent  large  sums  in  procuring  from  all  parts  of 
Europe,  manuscripts,  and  copies  of  manuscripts, 
tie  not  only  made  learned  and  critical  notes  on 
his  favorite  author,  but  procured  those  of  Andrew 
Downes  and  John  Bois,  two  of  his  fellow-laborers 


HENRY  SAYILE . 


167 


on  the  Translation  of  the  Bible.  His  edition  of 
one  thousand  copies  was  published  in  1613,  and 
makes  eight  immense  folios.  All  his  expenses  in 
this  labor  of  love  amounted  to  above  eight  thou¬ 
sand  pounds,  of  which  the  paper  alone  cost  a 
fourth  part.*  It  was  fifty  years  before  all  the 
copies  were  sold.  The  Benedictines  in  Paris, 
however,  through  their  emissaries  in  England, 
succeeded  in  surreptitiously  procuring  the  labors 
of  the  learned  knight,  sheet  by  sheet,  as  they 
came  from  the  press.  These  they  reprinted  as 
they  were  received,  adding  a  Latin  translation, 
and  some  other  considerable  matter,  and  forming 
thirteen  mighty  folios.  By  this  transaction,  the 
friars  may  have  gained  the  most  glory,  but  sure- 
-  ly  are  not  entitled  to  much  honor. 

Sir  Henry  Savile  also  founded  two  professor¬ 
ships  at  Oxford,  with  liberal  endowments  ;  one  of 
geometry,  and  the  other  of  astronomy.  It  is  re¬ 
lated  of  him;  that  he  once  chanced  to  fall  in  with 
a  Master  Briggs,  of  the  rival  University  of  Cam¬ 
bridge.  In  a  learned  encounter,  Briggs  succeed¬ 
ed  in  demonstrating  some  point  in  opposition  to 


*  Making  the  usual  allowance  for  the  difference  in  the  value 
of  money  then  and  now,  he  expended  to  the  value  of  more  than 
three  hundred  thousand  dollars  ! 


168 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


the  previous  opinion  of  Sir  Henry.  This  pleased 
the  worthy  knight  so  well,  that  he  appointed  Mr. 
Briggs  to  one  of  his  professorships.  He  made 
other  valuable  benefactions  to  Oxford,  in  land, 
money,  and  books.  Many  of  his  books  are  still 
in  the  Bodleian  library  there. 

Sir  Henry  Savile  died  at  Eton  College,  where 
he  wTas  buried,  February  19th,  1621,  in  his  sev¬ 
enty-second  year.  He  was  styled,  “  that  maga¬ 
zine  of  learning,  whose  memory  shall  be  honora¬ 
ble  among  the  learned  and  the  righteous  for 
ever.”  He  left  an  only  daughter,  Elizabeth,  who 
was  married  to  Sir  John  Sedley,  a  wealthy  baro¬ 
net  of  Kent.  Sir  Henry’s  wife  was  Margaret, 
daughter  of  George  Dacres,  of  Cheshunt,  Esq. 
It  is  said  that  Sir  Henry  was  a  singularly  hand¬ 
some  man,  and  that  no  lady  could  boast  a  finer 
complexion. 

He  was  so  much  of  a  book-worm,  and  so  sedu¬ 
lous  at  his  study,  that  his  lady,  who  vv^as  not  very 
deep  in  such  matters,  thought  herself  neglected. 
She  once  petulantly  said  to  him,  “  Sir  Henry,  I 
would  that  I  were  a  book,  and  then  you  would  a 
little  more  respect  me.”  A  person  standing  by 
was  so  ungallant  as  to  reply,  “  Madam,  you  ought 
to  be  an  almanac,  that  he  might  change  at  the 
year’s  end.”  At  this  retort  the  lady  was  not  a 


JOHN  PERYN. 


169 


little  offended.  A  little  before  the  publication  of 
Chrysostom,  when  Sir  Henry  lay  sick,  Lady  Sa- 
vile  said,  that  if  Sir  Harry  died,  she  wmuld  burn 
Chrysostom  for  killing  her  husband.  To  this, 
Mr.  Bois,  who  rendered  Sir  Henry  much  assist¬ 
ance  in  that  laborious  undertaking,  meekly  re¬ 
plied,  that  “so  to  do  were  great  pity.”  To  him, 
the  lady  said,  “  Why,  who  was  Chrysostom  ?” 
“  One  of  the  sweetest  preachers  since  the  apos¬ 
tles’  times,”  answered  the  enthusiastic  Bois. 
Whereupon  the  lady  was  much  appeased,  and 
said,  “  she  would  not  burn  him  for  all  the  world.” 
From  these  precious  samples,  it  may  be  inferred 
that  your  fine  lady  is  much  the  same  in  all  ages 
of  the  world,  no  matter  whom  she  may  marry. 

It  is  enough  for  our  purpose,  that  Sir  Henry 
Savile  was  one  of  the  most  profound,  exact,  and: 
critical  scholars  of  his  age  ;  and  meet  and  ripe  to 
take  a  prominent  part  in  the  preparation  of  our 
incomparable  version. 


JOHN  PERYN. 

Dr.  Peryn  was  of  St.  John’s  College,  Oxford, 

where  he  was  elected  Fellow  in  1575.  He  was 

the  King’s  Professor  of  Greek  in  the  University  ; 

8 


170 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


and  afterwards  Canon  of  Christ’s  Church.  He 
was  created  Doctor  of  Divinity  in  1596.  When 
placed  in  the  commission  to  translate  the  Bible, 
he  was  Vicar  of  Watling  in  Sussex.  His  death 
took  place  May  9th,  1615.  These  scanty  items 
may  serve  to  show,  that  he  w^as  fit  to  take  part, 
wfith  his  learned  and  reverend  brethren,  in  pre¬ 
paring  our  English  Bible  for  the  press. 


RALPH  RAVENS. 

This  was  the  Vicar  of  Eyston  Magna,  who  was 
made  Doctor  of  Divinity  in  1595.  He  died  in 
1616.  It  is  thought  that  he  did  not  act,  for  some 
reason,  under  the  King’s  commission  ;  and  that 
Doctors  Aglionby  and  Ilutten  were  appointed  in 
place  of  him,  and  of  Eedes,  who  died  before  the 
wrork  w  as  begun. 


JOHN  HARMAR. 

A  native  of  Newbury,  in  Berkshire.  He  was 
educated  in  William  de  Wykeham’s  School  at 
Winchester  ;  and  also  at  St.  Mary’s  College, 


JOHN  HARMAR. 


171 


founded  by  the  same  munificent  Wykeham  at 

Oxford.  “  Manners  make  the  man,  quoth  Wil- 

« 

liam  of  Wykeham,”  is  a  motto  frequently  in¬ 
scribed  on  the  buildings  of  his  School  and  Col¬ 
lege.  Mr.  Harmar  became  a  Fellow  of  his  Col¬ 
lege  in  1574.  He  was  appointed  the  King’s 
Professor  of  Greek  in  1585,  being,  at  the  time, 
in  holy  orders.  He  was  head-master  of  Win¬ 
chester  School,  for  nine  years,  and  Warden  of  his 
College  for  seventeen  years.  He  became  Doctor 
of  Divinity  in  1605.  His  death  took  place  in 
1613.  He  was  a  considerable  benefactor  to  the 
libraries  both  of  the  school  and  the  college  of 
Wykeham’s  foundation.  For  all.  his  preferments 
he  was  indebted  to  the  potent  patronage  of  the 
Earl  of  Leicester.  He  accompanied  that  noble¬ 
man  to  Paris,  where  he  held  several  dehates  with 
the  popish  Doctors  of  the  Sorbonne.  He  stood 
high  in  the  crowd  of  tall  scholars,  the  literary 
giants  of  the  time.  He  published  several  learned 
works  ;  among  them,  Latin  translations  of  several 
of  Chrysostom’s  writings, — also  an  excellent 
translation  of  Beza’s  French  Sermons  into  Eng¬ 
lish,  by  which  he  shows  himself  to  have  been  a 
Calvinist,  the  master  of  an  excellent  English 
style,  and  an  adept  in  the  difficult  art  of  trans¬ 
lating.  Wood  says,  that  he  was  “a  most  noted 


172 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


Latinist,  Grecian,  and  Divine  ;”  and  that  he  was 
“  always  accounted  a  most  solid  theologist,  admi¬ 
rably  well  read  in  the  Fathers  and  Schoolmen, 
and  in  his  younger  years  a  subtle  Aristotelian,” 
Of  him  too  it  may  be  said,  “  having  had  a  princi¬ 
pal  hand  in  the  Translation,”  that  he  was  worthy 
to  rank  with  those,  who  gave  the  Scriptures  in 
their  existing  English  form,  to  untold  millions, 
past,  present,  and  to  come. 


WILLIAM  BARLOW. 

The  fifth  company  of  Translators  was  com¬ 
posed  of  seven  divines,  who  held  their  meetings 
at  Westminster.  Their  special  portion  of  the 
work  was  the  whole  of  the  Epistles  of  the  New 
Testament.  The  president  of  this  company  was 
Dr.  William  Barlow,  at  the  time  of  his  appoint¬ 
ment,  Dean  ol  Chester.  He  belonged  to  an  an¬ 
cient  and  respectable  family,  residing  at  Barlow, 
in  Lancashire.  He  was  bred  a  student  of  Trinity 
Hall,  in  the  University  of  Cambridge.  He  grad- 
uated  in  1584,  became  Master  of  Arts  in  1587 
and  was  admitted  to  a  fellowship  in  Trinity  Hall 
in  1590.  Seven  years  later,  Archbishop  Whitgift 
made  him  sinecure  Rector  of  Orpington  in  Kent. 


WILLIAM  BARLOW. 


173 


He  was  one  of  the  numerous  ecclesiastics  of  that 
day,  who  were  courtiers  by  profession,  and  stu¬ 
died  with  success  the  dark  science  of  preferment. 
When  Robert  Devereux,  Earl  of  Essex,  was  be¬ 
headed  for  high  treason  in  the  year  1600,  Dr. 
Barlow*  preached  on  the  occasion,  at  St.  Paul’s 
Cross,  in  London.  He  was  now  a  “  rising  man.” 
In  1601,  the  prebendship  of  Chiswick  was  con¬ 
ferred  upon  him,  and  he  held  it  till  he  was  made 
Bishop  of  Lincoln.  In  the  year  1603,  he  became 
at  the  same  time,  Prebendary  of  Westminster 
and  Dean  of  Chester.  This  latter  prebendship, 
he  held  in  “  commendam  ”  to  the  day  of  his 
death. 

When,  soon  after  the  accession  of  James  Stuart 
to  the  throne  of  England,  the  famous  Conference 
was  held  at  Hampton  Court,  that  monarch  sum¬ 
moned,  as  we  have  said,  four  Puritan  divines, 
whom  he  arbitrarily  constituted  representatives 
of  their  brethren.  To  confront  them,  he  sum¬ 
moned  a  large  force  of  bishops  and  cathedral  cler¬ 
gymen,  of  whom  Dean  Barlow'  was  one,  all  led  to 
the  charge  by  the  doughty  king  himself.  At  the 
different  meetings  of  the  Conference,  the  Puri¬ 
tans  wTere  required  to  state  wThat  changes  their 
party  desired  in  the  doctrine,  discipline,  and  wor¬ 
ship,  of  the  Church  of  England.  As  soon  as  they 


174 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


ventured  to  specify  any  thing,  they  were  brow¬ 
beaten  and  hectored  in  the  most  abusive  manner 
by  the  monarch  and  his  minions.  In  his  time, 
when  comparing  his  reign  with  the  preceding,  it 
was  common  to  distinguish  him  by  the  title 
Queen  James  ;  and  his  illustrious  predecessor,  as 
King  Elizabeth.  When  his  learned  preceptor, 
Buchanan,  was  asked  how  he  came  to  make  such 
a  pedant  of  his  royal  pupil,  the  old  disciplinarian 
was  cruel  enough  to  reply,  that  it  was  the  best 
he  could  make  of  him!  This  prince,  who  fancied 
himself  to  be,  what  his  flatterers  swore  he  was, 
an  incomparable  adept  in  the  sciences  of  theolo¬ 
gy  and  “kingcraft,”  as  he  termed  it,  was  quite  in 
his  element  during  the  discussions  at  Hampton 
Court.  He  trampled  with  such  fury  on  the  claims 
of  Puritanism,  that  his  prelates,  lordly  and  cring¬ 
ing  by  turns,  were  in  raptures  ;  and  went  down 
on  their  knees,  and  blessed  God  extemporaneous¬ 
ly,  for  “  such  a  king  as  had  not  been  seen  since 
Christ’s  day  !”  Surely  they  were  thrown  off 
their  guard  by  their  exultation,  when  they  set 
such  an  impressive  example  of  “praying  without 
book.” 

This  matter  is  mentioned  here  the  more  fully, 
because  the  principal  account  we  have  of  this 
Conference  is  given  by  the  Dean  of  Chester.  It 


f 


WILLIAM  BARLOW. 


175 


is  not  strange  that  the  Puritans  make  but  a  sorry 
figure  in  his  report  of  the  transactions.  Gagged 
by  royal  insolence,  and  choked  by  priestly  abuse, 
it  could  hardly  have  been  otherwise.  Indeed, 
they  were  only  summoned,  that,  under  pretence 
of  considering  their  grievances,  the  King  might 
have  an  opportunity  to  throw  off  his  mask,  and  to 
show  himself  in  his  true  character,  as  a  deter¬ 
mined  enemy  to  further  reformation  in  his 
Church.  Dr.  Barlow’s  account  is  evidently 
drawn  up  in  a  very  unfriendly  disposition  to¬ 
ward  the  Puritan  complainants,  and  labors  to 
make  their  statements  of  grievances  appear  as 
weak  and  witless  as  possible.  Had  the  pencil 
been  held  by  a  Puritan  hand,  no  doubt  the  sketch 
would  have  been  altogether  different.  The  tem¬ 
per  of  the  King  and  of  his  sycophantic  court- 
clergy  may  be  inferred  from  the  mirth,  which, 
Dr.  Barlow  says,  was  excited  by  a  definition  of  a 
Puritan ,  quoted  from  one  Butler,  a  Cambridge 
man, — “  A  Puritan  is  a  Protestant  frayed  out  of 
his  wits  !”  The  plan  of  the  King  and  his  mitred 
counsellors  was,  the  substitution  of  an  English 
popery  in  the  place  of  Romish  popery.  Their 
notions  were  well  expressed,  some  years  after¬ 
ward,  in  a  sermon  at  St.  Mary’s,  Cambridge, — 


176 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


“  As  at  the  Olympic  games,  he  was  counted  the 
conqueror  who  could  drive  his  chariot-wheels 
nearest  the  mark,  yet  not  so  as  to  hinder  his 
running,  or  to  stick  thereon  ;  so  he  who,  in  his 
sermons,  can  preach  near  popery,  and  yet  not 
quite  popery,  there  is  your  man  !” 

As  we  have  already  related,  almost  the  only 
request  vouchsafed  to  the  Puritans  at  this  Con¬ 
ference  was  one  which  was  well  worth  all  the 
rest.  The  King  granted  Dr.  Reynolds’s  motion 
for  a  new  translation  of  the  Bible,  to  be  prepared 
by  the  ablest  divines  in  his  realm.  Dr.  Barlow 
was  actively  employed  in  the  preliminary  ar¬ 
rangements.  He  was  also  appointed  to  take 
part  in  the  work  itself ;  in  which,  being  a  tho¬ 
rough  bred  scholar,  he  did  excellent  service. 

In  the  course  of  the  work,  in  1605,  being,  at  the 
time,  Rector  of  one  of  the  London  parishes,  St. 
Dunstan’s  in  the  East,  Dr.  Barlow  was  made 
Bishop  of  Rochester.  He  was  promoted  to  the 
wealthier  see  of  Lincoln  in  1608,  where  he  pre- 
sided  with  all  dignity  till  his  death.  He  died  at 
a  time  when  he  had  some  hopes  of  getting  the 
bishopric  of  London.  His  decease  took  place  at 
his  episcopal  joalace  of  Buckden,  where  he  was 
buried  in  1613.  He  published  several  books 


JOHN  SPENCER. 


177 


and  pamphlets,  which  prove  him  not  out  of  place 
when  put  among  the  learned  men  of  that  erudite 
generation  of  divines. 


JOHN  SPENCER. 

This  very  learned  man  was  a  native  of  the  coun¬ 
ty  of  Suffolk.  He  became  a  student  of  Corpus 
Christi  College,  Oxford,  where  he  graduated  in 
1577.  He  was  elected  Greek  lecturer  for  that  Col¬ 
lege,  being  then  but  nineteen  years  of  age.  His 
election  was  strenuously,  but  vainly,  opposed  by 
Dr.  Reynolds,  partly  on  account  of  his  youth, 
and  on  the  ground  of  some  irregularity  in  his  ap¬ 
pointment.  Perhaps  this  opposition  was  also  to 
be  ascribed  to  the  fact,  that  young  Spencer  early 
attached  himself  to  that  party  in  his  College 
which  dreaded  Puritanism  quite  as  much  as 
Popery.  In  1579,  he  was  chosen  Fellow  of  the 
same  College. 

He  was  the  fellow-student,  and,  like  Saravia, 

and  Savile,  and  Reynolds,  the  intimate  friend  of 

Richard  Hooker,  the  author  of  that  famous  work, 

“  The  Laws  of  Ecclesiastical  Polity.”  This 

work,  in  the  preparation  of  which  Spencer  was 
8* 


178 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


constantly  consulted,  and  was  even  said  to  have 
“  had  a  special  hand”  as  in  part  its  author,  and 
which  he  edited  after  Hooker’s  death, — this  work 
is  to  this  day  the  “  great  gun”  on  the  ramparts  of 
the  Episcopal  sect.  Its  argument,  however,  is 
very  easily  disposed  of.  It  is  thus  described  by 
Dr.  James  Bennett  ; — “  The  architecture  of  the 
fabric  resembles  Dagon’s  temple  ;  for  it  rests 
mainly  upon  two  grand  pillars,  which,  so  long  as 
they  continue  sound,  will  support  all  its  weight. 
The  first  is,  ‘  that  the  Church  of  Christ,  like  all 
other  societies,  has  power  to  make  laws  for  its 
well-being and  the  second,  that  ‘  where  the 
sacred  Scriptures  are  silent,  human  authority 
may  interpose.’  But  if  some  Samson  can  be 
found  to  shake  these  pillars  from  their  base,  the 
whole  edifice,  with  the  lords  of  the  Philistines  in 
their  seats,  and  the  multitude  with  which  it  is 
crowded,  will  be  involved  in  one  common  ruin. 
Grant  Mr.  Hooker  these  two  principles,  and  his 
arguments  cannot  be  confuted.  But  if  a  Puritan 
can  show  that  the  Church  of  Christ  is  different 
from  all  civil  societies,  because  Christ  had 
framed  a  constitution  for  it,  and  that  where  the 
Scriptures  are  silent,  and  neither  enjoin  nor  for¬ 
bid,  no  human  association  has  a  right  to  inter¬ 
pose  its  authority,  but  should  leave  the  matter  in- 


JOHN  SPENCER. 


179 


different ;  in  such  a  case,  Hooker’s  system  would 
not  be  more  stable  than  that  of  the  Eastern  phi¬ 
losopher,  who  rested  the  earth  on  the  back  of  an 
elephant,  who  stood  upon  a  huge  tortoise,  which 
stood  upon  nothing.” 

After  the  death  of  Hooker  in  1600,  his  papers 
were  committed  to  Dr.  Spencer,  the  associate 
and  assistant  of  his  studies,  to  superintend  their 
publication.  He  attended  carefully  to  this  liter¬ 
ary  executorship,  till  the  translation  of  the  Bible 
began  to  engross  his  attention,  when  he  commit¬ 
ted  the  other  duty,  though  still  retaining  a  su¬ 
pervisory  care,  to  a  young  and  enthusiastic  ad¬ 
mirer  of  Hooker.  The  publication  was  not  com¬ 
pleted  at  the  time  of  Dr.  Spencer’s  death,  and 
the  papers  of  Hooker  passed  into  other  hands. 

When  he  became  Master  of  Arts,  in  1580,  John 
Spencer  entered  into  orders,  and  became  a  popu¬ 
lar  preacher  He  was  eventually  one  of  King 
James’s  chaplains.  His  wife  was  a  pupil  of 
Hooker’s,  as  well  as  her  brothers,  George  and 
William  Cranmer,  who  became  diplomatic  char¬ 
acters,  and  warm  patrons  of  their  celebrated 
teacher.  Mrs.  Spencer  was  a  great-niece  of 
Thomas  Cranmer,  that  Archbishop  of  Canter¬ 
bury,  whom  Queen  Mary  burnt  at  the  stake  for 
his  Protestantism.  In  1589,  Dr.  Spencer  was 


180 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


made  Vicar  of  Alveley  in  Essex,  which  he  re¬ 
signed,  in  1592,  for  the  vicarage  of  Broxborn. 
In  1599,  he  was  Vicar  of  St.  Sepulchre’s,  beyond 
Newgate,  London.  He  was  made  President  of 
Corpus  Christi  College,  on  the  death  of  Dr.  Rey¬ 
nolds,  in  1607.  Dr.  Spencer  was  appointed  to  a 
prebendal  stall  in  St.  Paul’s,  London,  in  1612. 
His  death  took  place  on  the  third  day  of  April, 
1614,  when  he  was  fifty-five  years  of  age.  Of 
his  eminent  scholarship  there  can  be  no  question 
He  was  a  valuable  helper  in  the  great  work  of 
preparing  our  common  English  version.  We 
have  but  one  publication  from  his  pen,  a  sermon 
preached  at  St.  Paul’s  Cross,  and  printed  after 
his  decease,  of  which  Keble,  who  is  Professor  of 
Poetry  at  Oxford,  says,  that  it  is  “  full  of  elo¬ 
quence,  and  striking  thoughts.” 


ROGER  FENTON. 

♦ 

This  clergyman  was  a  native  of  Lancashire. 
He  was  Eellow  of  Pembroke  Hall,  in  Cambridge 
University.  For  many  years,  he  was  “the  pain¬ 
ful,  pious,  learned,  and  beloved  minister  ”  of  St. 
Stephen’s,  Walbrook,  London,  to  which  he  was 
admitted  in  1601.  He  was  also  presented  by  the 


ROGER  FENTON. 


181 


Queen  to  the  Rectory  of  St.  Bennet’s,  Sherehog, 
which  he  resigned  in  1606,  for  the  vicarage  of 
Chigwell,  in  Essex.  He  was  also  collated,  in 
place  of  Bishop  Andrews,  to  the  Prebendship  of 
Pancras  in  St.  Paul’s  cathedral,  where  he  was 
Penitentiary  of  St.  Paul’s.  His  prebendship  of 
Pancras  also  made  him,  (so  Newcourt  says,) 
Rector  of  that  church.  He  died  January  16th, 
1616,  aged  fifty  years.  He  was  buried  under  the 
communion-table  of  St.  Stephen’s,  where  there 
is  a  monument  erected  to  his  memory  by  his  pa¬ 
rishioners,  with  an  inscription  expressing  their 
affection  toward  him  as  a  pastor  eminent  for  his 
piety  and  learning. 

His  principal  publication  is  described  as  a 
“  solid  treatise”  against  usury.  His  most  inti¬ 
mate  friend  was  Dr.  Nicholas  Felton,  another 
London  minister.  The  following  singular  inci¬ 
dent  is  related  of  them  by  good  old  Thomas  Ful¬ 
ler  ; — “  Once  my  own  father  gave  Dr.  Fenton  a 
visit,  who  excused  himself  from  entertaining  him 
any  longer.  ‘Mr.  Fuller,’  said  he,  ‘hear  how 
the  passing  bell  tolls,  at  this  very  instant,  for 
my  dear  friend,  Dr.  Felton,  now  a-dying.  I 
must  to  my  study,  it  being  mutually  agreed  up¬ 
on  betwixt  us,  in  our  healths,  that  the  survivor 


182 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


of  us  should  preach  the  other’s  funeral  sermon.’ 
But  see  a  strange  change  !  God,  ‘  to  whom  be¬ 
long  the  issues  of  death,’  with  the  patriarch  Ja¬ 
cob  blessing  his  grand-children,  ‘  wittingly  guid¬ 
ed  his  hands  across,’  reaching  out  death  to  the 
living,  and  life  to  the  dying.  So  that  Dr.  Felton 
recovered,  and  not  only  performed  that  last  office 
to  his  friend,  Dr.  Fenton,  but  survived  him  more 
than  ten  years,  and  died  Bishop  of  Ely.”  By  that 
funeral  sermon,  it  appears  that  Dr.  Fenton  was 
free  of  the  Grocers’  Company,  a  wealthy  guild, 
to  whom  belonged  the  patronage  of  St.  Stephen’s 
Church.  He  was  also  Preacher  of  Gray’s  Inn,  a 
society  or  college  of  lawyers.  Bishop  Felton 
says  of  him, — “  None  was  fitter  to  dive  into  the 
depths  of  school  divinity.  He  was  taken  early 
from  the  University,  and  had  many  troubles  after¬ 
ward  ;  yet  he  grew,  and  brought  forth  fruit.  Nev¬ 
er  a  more  learned  hath  Pembroke  Hall  brought 
forth,  with  but  one  exception.”  This  nameless 
exception  was  doubtless  the  great  Bishop  Lance¬ 
lot  Andrews.  Dr.  Fenton  suffered  severely  in 
regard  to  health,  in  consequence  of  his  sedentary 
habits.  “In  the  time  of  his  sickness,”  says  his 
friend,  “  I  told  him,  that  his  weakness  and  dis¬ 
ease  were  trials  only  of  his  faith  and  patience.” 


RALPH  HUTCHINSON - WM.  DAKINS.  183 


Oh  no,  he  answered,  they  are  not  trials  but  cor¬ 
rections  * 


RALPH  HUTCHINSON. 

Dr.  Hutchinson,  at  the  time  of  his  appoint¬ 
ment,  was  President  of  St.  John’s  College,  hav¬ 
ing  entered  that  office  in  1590.  This,  which 
marks  him  as  a  learned  man,  is  all  we  can  tell 
of  him. 


WILLIAM  DAKINS. 

He  was  educated  at  Westminster  School,  and 
admitted  to  Trinity  College,  Cambridge,  May 
8th,  1587.  He  was  chosen  Fellow  in  1593.  He 
became  Bachelor  in  Divinity  in  1601.  The  next 
year  he  was  appointed  Greek  lecturer.  In  1604, 
he  was  appointed  Professor  of  Divinity  at  Gresh¬ 
am  College,  London.  He  was  elected  on  the  re¬ 
commendation  of  the  Vice-Chancellor  and  Heads 


*  Non  probationes,  sed  castigationes. 


184 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


of  Colleges  in  Cambridge,  and  also  of  several  of 
the  nobility,  and  of  the  King  himself.  The  King 
in  his  letter  to  the  Mayor  and  Aldermen  of  Lon¬ 
don,  calls  him  “  an  ancient  divine,”  not  in  allu¬ 
sion  to  his  age,  but  his  character.  This  appoint¬ 
ment  was  given  him  as  a  remuneration  for  his 
undertaking  to  do  his  part  in  the  Bible-transla- 
tion.  He  was  considered  peculiarly  fit  to  he  em¬ 
ployed  in  this  work,  on  account  of  “  his  skill  in 
the  original  languages.”  In  1606,  he  wTas  cho¬ 
sen  Dean  of  Trinity  College  ;  but  died  a  few 
months  after,  on  the  second  day  of  October,  be¬ 
ing  less  than  forty  years  of  age.  Though  taken 
away  in  the  midst  of  his  days,  and  of  the  work 
on  account  of  which  we  are  interested  in  him,  he 
evidently  stood  in  high  repute  as  to  his  qualifica¬ 
tions  for  a  duty  of  such  interest  and  importance. 


MICHAEL  RABBET. 

All  we  can  tell  of  him  is,  that  he  was  a  Bach¬ 
elor  in  Divinity,  and  Rector  of  the  Church  of  St. 
Vedast,  Foster  Lane,  London. 


MR.  SANDERSON. 


185 


MR.  SANDERSON. 

The  bare  name  is  all  that  is  left  to  us  with  any 
certainty.  Wood  mentions  a  Thomas  Sanderson, 
D.  D.,  of  Baliol  College,  Oxford,  who  was  in¬ 
stalled  Archdeacon  of  Rochester  in  1606  ;  but 
does  not  say  whether  he  was  one  of  our  Transla¬ 
tors. 


The  sixth  and  last  company  of  King  James’s 
Bible-translators  met  at  Cambridge.  To  this 
company  was  assigned  all  the  Apocryphal  books, 
which,  in  those  times,  were  more  read  and'  ac¬ 
counted  of  than  now,  though  by  no  means  placed 
on  a  level  wTith  the  canonical  books  of  Scrip¬ 
ture.*  Still  this  party  of  the  Translators  had  as 


*  The  reasons  assigned  for  not  admitting  the  apocryphal  books 
into  the  cnnov ,  or  list,  of  inspired  Scriptures  are  briefly  the  fol- 
loAving.  1.  Not  one  of  them  is  in  the  Hebrew  language,  which 
was  alone  used  by  the  inspired  historians  and  poets  of  the  Old 
Testament.  2.  Not  one  of  the  •writers  lays  any  claim  to  in¬ 
spiration.  3.  These  books  were  never  acknowledged  as  sacred 
Scriptures  by  the  Jewish  Church,  and  therefore  were  never 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


much  to  do  as  either  of  the  others,  in  the  repeat¬ 
ed  revision  of  the  version  of  the  canonical  books 

JOHN  DUPORT. 

The  president  of  this  company  was  Dr.  Duport, 
then  Master  of  Jesus  College,  and  Prebendary 
of  Ely.  He  was  son  of  Thomas  Duport,  Esquire  ; 
and  was  born  at  Shepshead,  in  Leicestershire. 
He  was  bred  at  Jesus  College,  Cambridge,  where 
he  became  Fellow,  and  afterwards  Master,  which 
latter  office  he  exercised  with  great  reputation  for 
nearly  thirty  years.  He  was  a  liberal  benefactor 
of  the  College.  In  1580  he  was  Proctor  in  the 
University  ;  and  in  the  same  year  he  was  made 
Rector  of  Harlton  in  Cambridgeshire.  He  after¬ 
wards  bestowed  the  perpetual  advowsance  of 
this  rectory  on  his  College.  He  was  soon  after 


sanctioned  by  our  Lord.  4.  They  were  not  allowed  a  place 
among  the  sacred  books,  during  the  first  four  centuries  of  the 
Christian  Church.  5.  They  contain  fabulous  statements,  and 
statements  which  contradict  not  only  the  canonical  Scriptures, 
but  themselves  ;  as  when,  in  the  two  Books  of  Maccabees,  Anti- 
ochus  Epiphanes  is  made  to  die  three  different  deaths  in  as  many 
different  places.  6.  It  inculcates  doctrines  at  variance  with  the 
Bible,  such  as  prayers  for  the  dead  and  sinless  perfection.  7.  It 
teaches  immoral  practices,  such  as  lying,  suicide,  assassination  and 
magical  incantation.  For  these  and  other  reasons,  the  Apocry¬ 
phal  books,  which  are  all  in  Greek,  except  one  which  is  extant 
only  in  Latin,  are  valuable  only  as  ancient  documents,  illustrative 
of  the  manners,  language,  opinions  and  history  of  the  East. 


JOHN  DUPORT. 


187 


Rector  of  Bosworth  and  Medbourn,  in  his  native 
County.  In  1583,  he  was  collated  to  the  rectory 
of  Fulham,  in  Middlesex,  which  was  a  sinecure. 
Such  frequent  change  of  parishes,  in  a  clergy¬ 
man  of  the  Anglican  Church,  is  a  sign  of  great 
prosperity  ;  as  they  are  always  changes  from  a 
poorer  benefice  to  a  better,  and  are  considered  as 
“  preferments.” 

Almost  every  parish,  whenever  vacant,  is  in  the 
gift  of  some  man  of  wealth,  or  high  officer  in 
church,  state,  university,  or  other  corporation: 
Hence  frequent  removals  to  more  desirable  par¬ 
ishes  tend  to  shew  that  a  clergyman  has  very 
influential  friends  or  is  in  high  esteem.  Still  this 
does  not  necessarily  follow,  inasmuch  as  a  very 
great  part  of  this  business  is  mere  matter  of  bar¬ 
gain  and  sale.  The  person  who  has  the  right  of 
presenting  a  clergyman  to  be  pastor  of  a  vacant 
church  is  called  the  “  patron  and  the  right  of 
presentation  is  called  the  “  advowson.”  These 
advowsons  are  bought,  sold,  bequeathed  or  inherit¬ 
ed,  like  any  other  right  or  possession.  They  may 
be  owned  by  heretics  or  infidels,  who  are  under 
very  little  restraint  as  to  their  choice  of  ministers 
to  fill  the  vacancies  that  occur.  If  the  bishop 
should  refuse  to  institute  the  person  nominated,  it 
would  involve  the  prelate  in  great  trouble,  un 


188  THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 

less  he  could  make  out  a  very  strong  case  against 
the  fitness  of  the  rejected  presentee.  Meanwhile 
the  flocks,  who  pay  the  tithes  which  support  the 
minister,  have  no  voice  in  the  matter,  except  in 
comparatively  few  parishes.  They  may  be  dear¬ 
ly  loved  for  their  flesh  and  fleece  ;  but  they  must 
take  the  shepherd  who  is  set  over  them.  If  they 
dislike  his  pasture,  and  jump  the  fences  to  feed 
elsewhere,  they  must  pay  tithes  and  offerings  all 
the  same  to  the  convivial  rector,  fox-hunting 
vicar,  or  Puseyite  priest,  who  has  secured  the 
“  benefice  ”  or  “living.”  It  is  astonishing,  that, 
under  such  an  ecclesiastical  system,  the  Church 
of  England  is  not  more  thoroughly  corrupted. 
And  it  is  astonishing,  that  such  a  system  can  be 
endured  to  the  middle  of  such  a  century  as  this, 
by  a  nation  whose  loudest  and  proudest  boast  is 
of  liberty. 

While  Dr.  Duport  was  rapidly  rising  in  the 
scale  of  preferment,  he  retained  his  connection 
with  Jesus  College.  After  he  was  made  Master 
in  1590,  he  was  four  times  elected  Vice-Chan¬ 
cellor,  the  highest  resident  officer,  of  the  Uni¬ 
versity.  In  1585,  he  became  Precentor  of  St. 
Paul’s,  London  ;  and  in  1609,  was  made  Preben¬ 
dary  of  Ely.  He  married  Rachel,  daughter  to 
Richard  Cox,  Bishop  of  Ely.  They  were  very 


WM.  BRA1  NTH  WAITE - JEREMIAH  RADCL1FFE.  189 

happy  in  their  son  James  Duport,  D.  D.,  a  dis-  » 
tinguished  Greek  professor  and  divine.  The 
father  died  about  Christmas,  in  1617,  leaving  a 
well-earned  reputation  as  “  a  reverend  man  in  his 
generation.”  Let  him  also  be  reverend  in  this 
generation,  for  his  agency  in  the  final  prepara¬ 
tion  of  the  Bible  in  English. 


WILLIAM  BRAINTHWAITE. 

Of  Dr.  Brainthwaite  we  recover  but  little.  He 
spent  his  life  in  Cambridge  University,  where  he 
was  first  a  student  of  Clare  Hall,  then  Fellow  of 
Emanuel  College,  and  at  last  Master  of  Gonvil 
and  Caius  College.  He  was  in  this  last  office, 
when  he  was  named  in  the  royal  commission  as 
one  of  the  Translators.  He  was  a  benefactor  of 
the  last-mentioned  colleges  ;  and  in  1619,  was 
Vice-Chancellor  of  the  University.  These  few 
items  go  to  mark  him  as  a  learned,  reverend,  and 
worshipful  divine. 


JEREMIAH  RADCLIFFE. 


Dr.  Radcliffe  was  one  of  the  Senior  Fellows  of 
Trinity  College,  Cambridge.  In  1588,  he  was 


190 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


Vicar  of  Evesham  ;  and  two  years  later,  he  was 
Rector  of  Orwell.  He  was  Vice-Master  of  his 
College  in  1597.  In  the  year  1600,  he  was  made 
Doctor  in  Divinity,  both  at  Cambridge  and  Ox¬ 
ford.  Thus  he,  too,  is  to  be  ranked  as  a  scho¬ 
lar  and  a  divine  by  calling.  His  death  took 
place  in  1612. 


SAMUEL  WARD. 

This  was  a  man  of  mark, — “  a  vast  scholar.” 
He  was  a  native  of  Bishop’s  Middleham,  in  the 
county  of  Durham.  His  father  was  a  gentleman 
of  “  more  ancientry  than  estate.”  He  studied 
at  Cambridge,  where  he  was  at  first  a  student  of 
Christ’s  College,  then  a  Fellow  of  Emanuel,  and 
afterwards  Master  of  Sidney  Sussex  College.  He 
entered  upon  this  latter  office  in  1609,  and  occu¬ 
pied  it  with  great  usefulness  and  honor  till  his 
death,  thirty-four  years  after.  His  college  flour¬ 
ished  greatly  under  his  administration.  Four 
new  fellowships  were  founded,  all  the  scholar¬ 
ships  augmented,  and  a  chapel  and  new  range  of 
buildings  erected,  all  in  his  time.  He  was  dis 
tinguished  for  the  gravity  of  his  deportment, 


SAMUEL  WARD. 


191 


and  for  the  integrity  with  which  he  discharged 
the  duties  of  his  Mastership. 

Being  appointed  chaplain  to  the  royal  favorite, 
Bishop  Montague,  he  was  by  that  prelate  made 
Archdeacon  of  Taunton  in  1615,  and  also  Pre¬ 
bendary  of  Wells.  The  King  next  year  presented 
him  to  the  rectory  of  Much-Munden  in  Hertford¬ 
shire  ;  and  also  appointed  him  one  of  his  chap¬ 
lains.  In  1617,  the  excellent  Dr.  Toby  Mathew, 
archbishop  of  York,  made  him  Prebendary  of 
Ampleford  in  the  cathedral  church  of  York  ; 
and  this  stall  Dr.  Ward  retained  as  long  as  he 
lived. 

King  James  sent  him,  in  1618,  to  the  Synod  of 
Dort,  in  Holland,  together  with  Bishops  Carle- 
ton,  Davenant,  and  Hall  ;  as  the  four  divines 
most  able  and  meet  to  represent  the  Church  of 
England,  at  that  famous  Council.  After  a  while 
Dr.  Goad,  a  powerful  divine  and  chaplain  to  Dr. 
Abbot,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  was  sent  in  the 
place  of  Dr.  Hall,  recalled  at  his  own  request,  on 
account  of  sickness.  The  English  delegates 
were  treated  wdth  the  highest  consideration  ;  and 
having  exerted  a  very  happy  influence  in  the 
Synod,  returned  with  great  honor  to  their  own 
country,  after  six  or  eight  months’  absence.  The 
sittings  of  the  Synod  began  November  3d,  1618, 


192 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


and  ended  April  29th  of  the  next  year.  During 
all  this  time,  the  States  General  of  Holland  al¬ 
lowed  the  British  envoys  ten  pounds  sterling  each 
day  ;  and,  at  their  departure,  gave  them  twm  hun- 
dred  pounds  to  bear  their  expenses  ;  and  also  to 
each  of  them  a  splendid  gold  medal,  representing 
the  Synod  in  session. 

At  this  celebrated  ecclesiastical  council,  Wal¬ 
ter  Balcanqual,  B.  D.,  Fellow  of  Pembroke  Hall, 
and  afterwards  Master  of  the  Savoy,  by  order  of 
King  James,  represented  the  Presbyterian  Church 
of  Scotland.  There  were  also,  besides  the  mem¬ 
bers  from  the  Dutch  provinces,  delegates  present 
from  Hesse,  the  Palatinate,  Bremen,  and  Swit¬ 
zerland,  all  of  whose  churches  practised  the 
Presbyterial  form  of  discipline  and  government. 
The  Church  of  England,  through  its  “  supreme 
head,”  acknowledged  and  communed  with  all 
these  as  true  churches  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
— sitting  and  acting  with  them,  by  its  delegated 
theologians,  in  a  solemn  ecclesiastical  assembly. 
Surely  the  spirit  of  the  Anglican  Church  in  those 
days  was  widely  different  from  what  is  manifest¬ 
ed  now. 

The  object  of  the  Synod,  which  was  convened 
by  order  of  their  High  Mightinesses,  the  Lords 
States  General,  was  to  settle  the  doctrinal  dis- 


SAMUEL  WARD. 


193 


putes  which  then  convujsed  the  established 
Church  of  the  Netherlands.  For  some  ten  years 
the  dispute  had  been  very  sharp  between  the 
Calvinists,  who  adhered  to  the  old  national  faith, 
and  the  followers  of  Arminius,  who  innovated  up¬ 
on  the  old  order  of  things.  The  points  in  dispute 
related  to  divine  predestination,  the  nature  and 
extent  of  the  atonement,  the  corruption  of  man, 
his  conversion  to  God,  and  the  perseverance  of 
saints.  These  five  points  are  explained  in  some 
sixty  “  canons,”  which  were  “  confirmed  by  the 
unanimous  consent  of  all  and  each  of  the  mem¬ 
bers  of  the  whole  Synod.”  The  Dordrechtan 
Canons  are,  perhaps,  the  most  careful  and  exact 
statement  of  the  Calvinistic  belief,  in  scientific 
form,  that  has  ever  been  drawn  up.  It  is  wisely 
framed,  so  that  all  the  usual  objections  to  these 
doctrines  are  forestalled  and  excluded  in  the  very 
form  of  their  statement.  Although  the  decrees 
of  Dordrecht  had-  not  the  desired  effect  of  quell¬ 
ing  the  errors  of  Arminianism,  they  are  w'orthy 
of  all  it  cost  to  procure  them.  At  the  time  of 
their  adoption,  King  James  was  very  hostile  to 
the  Arminians.  He  soon,  however,  became  more 
lenient  toward  them,  when  convinced  by  Bishop 
Laud,  that  the  Jaxity  and  pliancy  of  Arminianism 

made  it  far  more  supple  and  convenient  for  the 
9 


3  94 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


purposes  of  “  kingcraft  ”  and  civil  despotism, 
than  the  stiff  and  unyielding  temper  of  Calvin¬ 
ism,  whose  first  principle  is  obedience  to  God 
rather  than  to  man.  The  court  favor  took  such 
a  turn,  that  it  was  not  many  years  till,  in  answer 
to  a  question  as  to  what  the  Arminians  held,  it 
was  wittily  said,  that  they  held  almost  all  the 
best  bishoprics  and  deaneries  in  England. 

Before  going  home  to  England,  the  British  del¬ 
egates  made  a  tour  through  the  provinces  of  Hol¬ 
land,  and  were  received  with  great  respect  in 
most  of  the  principal  cities.  On  his  return,  Dr. 
Ward  resumed  his  duties  as  head  of  Sidney  Col¬ 
lege.  In  1621,  he  was  Vice-Chancellor  of  the 
University.  In  the  same  year,  he  was  made  the 
Lady  Margaret’s  Professor  of  Divinity,  which 
office  he  sustained  with  great  celebrity  for  more 
than  twenty  years.  The  English  Bible,  which 
he  actively  assisted  in  translating,  was  formally 
published  in  1$11.  Some  errors  of  the  press 
having  crept  into  the  first  edition,  and  others  into 
later  reprints,  King  Charles  the  First,  in  1638, 
had  another  edition  printed  at  Cambridge,  which 
was  revised  by  Dr.  Ward  and  Mr.  Bois,  two  of 
the  original  Translators  who  still  survived,  as¬ 
sisted  by  Dr.  Thomas  Goad,  Mr.  Mede,  and  other 
learned  men. 


SAMUEL  WARD. 


195 


When  the  Assembly  of  Divines  was  convened 
at  Westminster,  1643,  Dr.  Ward  was  summoned 
as  a  member,  but  never  attended.  In  doctrine, 
be  was  a  thorough  Puritan  ;  but  in  politics,  a 
staunch  royalist.  In  the  sad  and  distracted  times 
of  the  civil  wars,  as  Thomas  Fuller,  his  affec¬ 
tionate  pupil,  says,  “  he  turned  as  a  rock  riseth 
with  the  tide. — In  a  word,  he  was  accounted  a 
Puritan  before  these  times,  and  popish  in  these 
times;  and  yet,  being  always  the  same,  was  a 
true  Protestant  at  all  times.”  When  hostilities 
broke  out,  he  joined  the  other  heads  of  Colleges 
at  Cambridge,  in  sending  their  college-plate  to 
aid  the  tyrannical  Charles  Stuart,  whose  charac¬ 
ter,  partially  redeemed  by  some  private  virtues, 
has  been  so  admirably  exposed  by  Macaulay. 
“  Faithlessness,”  says  that  philosophic  historian, 
“  wras  the  chief  cause  of  his  disasters,  and  is  the 
chief  stain  on  his  memory.  He  was,  in  truth, 
impelled  by  an  incurable  propensity  to  dark  and 
crooked  wTays.  It  may  seem  strange  that  his 
conscience,  which,  on  occasions  of  little  mo¬ 
ment,  wras  sufficiently  sensitive,  should  never 
have  reproached  him  with  this  great  vice.  But 
there  is  reason  to  believe  that  he  was  perfidious, 
not  only  from  constitution  and  from  habit,  but 
also  on  principle.”  This  historical  judgment  may 


196 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


seem  severe  ;  but  its  truth  is  maintained  by  other 
competent  critics.  James  Stuart  was  undoubted¬ 
ly  one  of  the  worse  sort  of  monarchs  ;  but  of  him 
Coleridge  frankly  says, — “  James  I.,  in  my  hon¬ 
est  judgment,  was  an  angel,  compared  with  his 
sons  and  grandsons.” 

Dr.  Ward,  no  doubt,  like  many  other  good  men 
who  disliked  the  King’s  proceedings,  was  com¬ 
pelled,  by  his  conscientious  belief  in  the  long  es¬ 
tablished  doctrine  of  the  “  divine  right  of  kings,” 
to  uphold  his  sovereign.  In  consequence  of  his 
sending  the  college-plate  to  be  coined  for  the 
King’s  use,  the  parliamentary  authorities  de¬ 
prived  Dr.  Ward  of  his  professorship  and  master¬ 
ship,  and  confiscated  his  goods.  He  was  also,  in 
1642,  with  three  other  heads  of  colleges  involved 
in  the  same  transaction,  imprisoned  in  St.  John’s 
College  for  a  short  time.  During  his  confine¬ 
ment,  he  contracted  a  disorder  that  proved  fatal 
in  six  weeks  after  his  liberation,  which  was 
granted  on  account  of  his  sickness.  He  died,  in 
great  want,  at  an  advanced  age,  in  1643,  and 
was  the  first  person  buried  in  Sidney  Sussex 
Chapel.  A  beautiful  character  is  drawn  in  some 
Latin  verses  addressed  to  him  by  Df.  Thomas 
Goad,  the  close  of  which  is  thus  given  in  English 
by  Fuller 


SAMUEL  WARD. 


197 


“  N011©  thy  quick  sight,  grave  judgment,  can  beguile, 

So  skilled  in  tongues,  so  sinewy  in  style ; 

Add  to  all  these  that  peaceful  soul  of  thine, 

Meek,  modest,  which  all  brawlings  doth  decline.” 

Dr.  Ward  maintained  much  correspondence 
with  learned  men.  His  correspondence  with 
Archbishop  Ushur  reveals  traits  of  diversified 
learning,  especially  in  biblical  and  oriental  criti¬ 
cism.*  In  his  letters  to  the  elder  Vossius  he  ani¬ 
madverts  upon  that  distinguished  author’s  Histo- 
ry  of  Pelagianism.  His  character  cannot  be  bet¬ 
ter  described  than  in  the  following  beautiful  pas¬ 
sage  from  Dr.  Fuller’s  History  of  the  University 
of  Cambridge.  “  He  was  a  Moses,  not  only  for 
slowness  of  speech,  but  otherwise  meekness  of 
nature.  Indeed,  when,  in  my  private  thoughts,  I 
have  beheld  him  and  Dr.  Collins,!  (disputable 
whether  more  different,  or  more  eminent  in  their 
endowments,)  I  could  not  but  remember  the  run¬ 
ning  of  Peter  and  John  to  the  place  where  Christ 


*  Dr.  Usher,  in  one  of  these  letters,  corrects  a  misprint  in  the 
Translator  s  Preface,  where  the  name  Efnard  should  be  Eynard, 
or  Eginhardus. 

f  Samuel  Collins,  Provost  of  King's  College,  and  for  forty  years 
Regius  Professor.  “As  Caligula  is  said  to  have  sent  his  soldiers 
vainly  to  fight  against  the  tide,  with  the  same  success  have  any 
encountered  the  torrent  of  his  Latin  in  disputation.” 


N 


198 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


was  buried.  In  which  race,  John  came  first,  as 
youngest  and  swiftest  ;  but  Peter  first  entered 
the  grave.  Dr.  Collins  had  much  the  speed  of 
him  in  quickness  of  parts  ;  hut  let  me  say,  (nor 
doth  the  relation  of  pupil  misguide  me,)  the  other 
pierced  the  deeper  into  underground  and  profound 
points  in  divinity.  Now  as  high  winds  bring 
some  men  the  sooner  into  sleep,  so,  I  conceive, 
the  storms  and  tempests  of  these  distracted  times 
invited  this  good  old  man  the  sooner  to  his  long 
rest,  where  we  leave  him,  and  quietly  draw  the 
curtains  about  him.” 


ANDREW  DOWNES. 

Dr.  Downes  was  Fellow  of  St.  John’s  College, 

O  7 

Cambridge.  For  full  forty  years  he  was  Regius 
Professor  of  Greek  in  that  famous  University. 
He  is  especially  named  by  the  renowned  John 
Selden  as  eminently  qualified  to  share  in  the 
translation  of  the  Bible.  Thus  it  is  the  happiness 
of  Dr.  Downes  to  be  “praised  by  a  praised  man 
for  no  man  was  ever  more  exalted  for  learning 
and  critical  scholarship  than  Selden,  who  was 
styled  by  Dr.  Johnson,  “  monarch  in  letters 


ANDREW  DOWNES. 


199 


and  by  Milton,  “  chief  of  learned  men  in  Eng¬ 
land  and  by  foreigners,  “  the  great  dictator  of 
learning  of  the  English  nation.”  His  decisive 
testimony  to  Downes’s  ability  was  given  from 
personal  knowledge.  Andrew  Downes  was  one 
of  the  revising  committee  of  twelve,  composed 
of  the  principal  members  of  each  company, 
who  met  at  London  to  prepare  the  copy  for  the 
press.  This  venerable  Professor  is  spoken  of  as 
“  one  composed  of  Greek  and  industry.”  He 
bestowed  much  labor  on  Sir  Henry  Savile’s 
celebrated  edition  of  the  works  of  Chrysostom, 
and  many  of  the  learned  notes  were  furnished  by 
him.  His  pains  were  so  inlaid”  with  that 
monument  of  erudition,  that  “  both  will  be  pre¬ 
served  together.”  He  died,  Febuary  2nd,  1625, 
at  the  great  age  of  eighty-one  years. 


JOHN  BOIS. 

This  devoted  scholar  was  a  native  of  Nettle- 
stead,  in  Suffolk,  where  he  was  born  January 
3rd,  1560.  His  father  William  Bois,  a  convert 
from  papistry,  was  a  pious  minister,  and  a  very 
learned  man  ;  and  at  the  time  of  his  death,  was 


200 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


Rector  of  West  Stowe.  His  mother,  Mirable 
Poolye,  was  a  pious  woman,  and  a  great  reader 
of  the  Bible  in  the  older  translations.  He  was 
the  only  child  that  grew  up.  He  was  carefully 
taught  by  his  father  ;  and  at  the  age  of  Jive 
years,  he  had  read  the  Bible  in  Hebrew.  By  the 
time  he  was  six  years  old,  he  not  only  wrote 
Hebrew  legibly,  but  in  a  fair  and  elegant  char¬ 
acter.  Some  of  these  remarkable  manuscripts 
are  still  carefully  preserved.  This  precocious 
scholar,  who  yet  lived  to  a  ripe  and  hale  old 
age,  was  sent  to  school  at  Hadley,  where  he 
was  a  fellow-student  with  Bishop  Overall.  He 
was  admitted  to  St.  John’s  College,  Cambridge, 
in  1575.  He  soon  distinguished  himself  by  his 
great  skill  in  Greek,  writing  letters  in  that 
language  to  the  Master  and  Senior  Fellows,  when 
he  had  been  but  half  a  year  in  College.  Bois 
was  a  pupil  to  Dr.  Downes,  then  chief  lecturer  on 
the  Greek  language,  who  took  such  delight  in  his 
promising  disciple,  that  he  treated  him  with  great 
familiarity,  even  while  he  was  a  freshman.  In 
addition  to  his  lectures,  which  Dr.  Downes  read 
five  times  in  the  week,  he  took  the  youth  to  his 
chambers,  where  he  plied  him  exceedingly.  He 
there  read  with  him  twelve  Greek  authors,  in 
verse  and  prose,  the  hardest  that  could  be  foundj 


JOHN  BOIS. 


201 


both  for  dialect  and  phrase.  It  was  a  common 
practice  with  the  young-  enthusiast  to  go  to  the 
University  Library  at  four  o’clock  in  the  morning, 
and  stay  without  intermission  till  eight  in  the 
evening. 

When  John  Bois  was  elected  Fellow  of  his 
College  in  1580,  he  was  laboring  under  that 
formidable  disease,  the  small  pox.  But,  with  his 
usual  resolution,  rather  than  lose  his  seniority, 
he  had  himself  wrapped  in  blankets,  and  was 
carried  to  be  admitted  to  his  office  by  his  tutors, 
Henry  Coppinger  and  Andrew  Downes.  He  com¬ 
menced  the  study  of  medicine  ;  but  fancying 
himself  affected  with  every  disease  he  read  of,  he 
quitted  the  study  in  disgust,  and  turned  his  atten¬ 
tion  to  divinity.  He  was  ordained  a  deacon, 
June  21st,  1583  ;  and  the  next  day,  by  a  dispen¬ 
sation,  he  was  ordained  a  priest  of  the  Church  of 
England. 

For  ten  years,  he  was  Greek  lecturer  in  his 
college  ;  and,  during  that  time,  he  voluntarily 
lectured,  in  his  own  chamber,  at  four  o’clock  in 
the  morning,  most  of  the  Fellows  being  in  atten¬ 
dance  !  It  may  be  doubted,  whether,  at  the  pre¬ 
sent  day,  a  teacher  and  class  so  zealous  could  be 
found  at  old  Cambridge,  new  Cambridge,  or  any 

where  else, — not  excluding  laborious  Germany. 

9* 


202 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


At  this  time,  Thomas  Gataker,  afterwards  one  of 
the  most  distinguished  of  the  Westminster  Divines, 
was  a  pupil  to  Bois. 

On  the  death  of  his  father,  Mr.  Bois  succeeded 
to  the  rectory  of  West  Stow^e,  hut  soon  resigned  it, 
and  went  back  to  his  beloved  College.  The 
Earl  of  Shrewsbury  made  him  his  chaplain  ;  but 
this  too  he  soon  resigned.  When  he  was  about 
thirty-six  years  old,  Mr.  Holt,  Rector  of  Box-* 
worth,  died,  leaving  the  advowson  of  that  living 
in  part  of  a  portion  to  one  of  his  daughters  ;  and 
requesting  of  some  of  his  friends,  that  “  if  it 
might  be  procured,  Mr.  Bois,  of  St.  John’s  Col¬ 
lege,  might  become  his  successor.”  The  matter 
being  intimated  to  that  gentleman,  he  wsnt  over 
to  take  a  view  of  the  lady  thus  singularly  por¬ 
tioned,  and  commended  to  his  favorable  regards. 
The  parties  soon  took  a  sufficient  liking  to  each 
other,  and  the  somewrhat  mature  lover  wTas  pre¬ 
sented  to  the  parsonage  by  his  future  bride,  and 
instituted  by  Archbishop  Whitgift,  October  13th, 
1596.  He  fulfilled  the  other  part  of  the  bargain, 
by  marrying  the  lady,  February  7th,  1598;  and 
so  resigned  his  beloved  Fellowship  at  St.  John’s. 
He  could  not,  however,  wholly  separate  himself 
from  old  associates  and  pursuits.  Every  week 
he  rode  over  from  Boxworth  to  Cambridge  to 


JOHN  BOIS. 


203 


hear  some  of  the  Greek  lectures  of  Downes,  and 
the  Hebrew  exercises  of  Lively,  and  also  the 
divinity-acts  and  lectures.  Every  Friday  he 
met  with  neighboring  ministers,  to  the  number 
of  twelve,  to  give  an  account  of  their  studies,  and 
to  discuss  difficult  questions. 

^  File  thus  absorbed  in  studious  pursuits,  he 
left  his  domestic  affairs  to  the  management  of  his 
wife,  whose  want  of  skill  in  a  few  years  reduced 
him  to  bankruptcy.  He  was  forced  to  part  with 
his  chief  treasure,  and  to  sell  his  library,  which 
contained  one  of  the  most  complete  and  costly 
collections  of  Greek  literature  that  had  ever  been 
made.  This  cruel  loss  so  disheartened  him,  as 
almost  to  drive  the  poor  man  from  his  family  and 
his  native  country.  He  was,  however,  sincerely 
attached  to  his  wife,  with  whom  he  lived  in  great 
happiness  and  affection  for  five  and  forty  years. 

In  the  translation  of  the  Bible,  he  had  a  double 
share.  After  the  completion  of  the  Apocrypha, 
the  portion  assigned  to  his  company,  the  other 
Cambridge  company,  to  whom  was  assigned  from 
the  Chronicles  to  the  Canticles  inclusively,  ear¬ 
nestly  intreated  his  assistance,  as  he  was  equally 
distinguished  for  his  skill  in  Greek  and  Hebrew. 
They  were  the  more  earnest  for  his  aid,  because 
of  the  death  of  their  president,  Professor  Lively, 


204 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


which  took  place  shortly  after  the  work  was  un¬ 
dertaken.  During  the  four  years  thus  employed, 
Mr.  Bois  gave  close  attention  to  the  duty,  from 
Monday  morning  to  Saturday  evening,  spending 
the  Sabbaths  only  at  his  rectory  with  his  family. 
For  all  this  labor  he  received  no  worldly  compen¬ 
sation,  except  the  use  of  his  chambers  and  his 
board  in  commons.  When  the  work  had  been 
carried  through  the  first  stage,  he  was  one  of  the 
twelve  delegates  sent,  twTo  from  each  of  the  com¬ 
panies,  to  make  the  final  revision  of  the  work  at 
Stationers’  Hall,  in  London.  This  occupied  nine 
months,  during  which  each  member  of  the  com¬ 
mittee  received  thirty  shillings  per  week  from 
John  Barker,  the  King’s  printer,  to  whom  the 
copy-right  belonged.  Mr.  Bois  took  notes  of  all 
the  proceedings  of  this  committee. 

He  rendered  a  vast  amount  of  aid  to  his  fellow^- 
translator,  Sir  Henry  Savile,  in  his  great  literary 
undertaking,  the  edition  of  Chrysostom.  Sir 
Henry  speaks  of  him,  in  the  Preface,  as  the  “most 
ingenious  and  most  learned  Mr.  Bois  and  it  is 
said  that  the  aged  Professor  Downes  was  «o  much 
hurt  at  the  higher  commendations  bestowed  on 
his  quondam  pupil’s  share  in  that  labor  than  upon 
his  own,  that  he  never  got  entirely  over  it.  Mr. 
Bois,  however,  did  not  cease  to  regard  his  veteran 


JOHN  BOIS. 


205 


instructor  with  the  utmost  respect  and  esteem. 
For  his  many  years  of  hard  labor  bestowed  upon 
ChrySostom,  he  received  no  compensation,  ex¬ 
cept  a  single  copy  of  the  work.  This  was  prob¬ 
ably  owing  to  the  sudden  demise  of  Sir  Henry 
Savile,  who  was  intending  to  make  him  one  of 
the  Fellows  of  Eton  College 

Mr.  Bois  continued  to  be  quite  poor  and  neg¬ 
lected,  till  Dr.  Lancelot  Andrews,  then  Bishop  of 
Ely,  and  who  had  also  been  employed  in  the  Bi- 
ble-translation,  of  his  own  accord  made  him  a 
Prebendary  of  the  cathedral  church  of  Ely,  in 
1615.  He  there  spent  the  last  twenty-eight  years 
of  his  life,  in  studious  retirement,  providing  a 
curate  for  Boxworth.  After  his  removal  to  Ely, 
he  visited  Boxworth  twice  a  year,  to  administer 
the  sacraments  and  preach,  and  to  relieve  the 
wants  of  the  poor.  He  left,  at  his  death,  as 
many  leaves  of  manuscript  as  he  had  lived  days 
in  his  long  life  ;  for  even  in  his  old  age,  he  spent 
eight  hours  in  daily  study,  mostly  reading  and 
correcting  ancient  authors.  Among  his  writings, 
was  a  voluminous  commentary  in  Latin  on  the 
Gospels  ..and  Acts,  which  was  published  some 
twelve  years  after  his  decease. 

He  was  of  a  social  and  cheerful  disposition, 
and  had  a  great  fund  of  anecdote  at  command. 


206 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


He  kept  up  a  strict  family  government.  His 
charity  to  the  necessitous  poor  was  limited  only  by 
the  bottom  of  his  purse  ;  though  he  “  chofte  the 
lazy,”  knowing  that  charity’s  eyes  should  be 
open,  as  well  as  her  hands.  He  was  “  in  fastings 
oft,”  sometimes  twice  in  the  week  ;  and  punctual 
in  all  religious  duties.  His  preaching  was  with¬ 
out  notes,  though  not  without  much  prayer  and 
study.  In  performing  this  solemn  duty,  his  main 
endeavor  was  to  make  himself  easily  understood 
by  the  humblest  and  most  ignorant  of  his  hearers. 
This  is  a  wise  and  noble  trait  in  one  of  such  vast 
acquirements  ;  and  one  to  whom  Dalechamp,  in 
dedicating  to  him  a  eulogy  on  Thomas  Harrison, 
said  with  truth,  that  he  was  “  in  highest  esteem 
with  studious  foreigners,  and  second  to  none  in 
solid  attainments  in  the  Greek  tongue.”  He  was 
so  familiar  with  the  Greek  Testament,  that  he 
could,  at  any  time,  turn  to  any  word  that  it 
contained. 

His  manner  of  living  was  quite  peculiar.  He 
was  a  great  pedestrian  all  his  days.  He  was 
also  a  great  rider  and  swimmer  ;  and  possessed 
a  very  strong  constitution,  which  all  his 
hard  study  could  not  impair.  He  took  but  two 
meals,  dinner  and  supper,  and  never  drank  at 
any  other  time.  He  would  not  study  between 


JOHN  BOIS. 


207 


slipper  and  bed-time  ;  but  spent  the  interval  in 
pleasant  discourse  with  friends.  He  took  special 
care  of  his  teeth,  and  carried  them  nearly  all  to 
the  grave.  Up  to  his  death,  his  brow  was  un¬ 
wrinkled,  his  sight  clear,  his  hearing  quick,  his 
countenance  fresh,  and  head  not  bald.  He  as¬ 
cribed  his  health  and  longevity  to  the  observance 
of  three  rules,  given  him  by  one  of  his  college 
tutors,  Dr.  Whitaker  : — First,  always  to  study 
standing  ;  secondly,  never  to  study  in  a  draft  of 
air  ;  and  thirdly,  never  to  go  to  bed  with  his  feet 
cold  ! 

He  had  four  sons  and  three  daughters.  The 
first-born  son  died  an  infant.  The  second  son 
and  eldest  daughter  he  saw  married.  The  third 
son  died  of  consumption,  at  the  age  of  thirty,  at 
Ely,  where  he  was  a  canon  in  the  cathedral.  The 
youngest  son  died  of  the  small-pox,  while  a  stu¬ 
dent  of  St.  John’s  College.  Thus  the  father  was 
not  without  his  sore  afflictions.  These  seem  to 
have  been  sanctified  to  his  good.  He  said  of 
himself,  near  the  end  of  his  life, — “  There  has  not 
been  a  day  for  these  many  years,  in  which  I  have 
not  meditated  at  least  once  upon  my  death.” 
Thus  he  met  death,  at  last,  with  great  joy,  as  an 
old  acquaintance,  and  long  expected  friend.  Hav¬ 
ing  survived  his  wife  for  two  lonesome  years,  Mr. 


208 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


Bois  had  himself  carried  about  five  hours  before 
his  end,  into  the  room  where  she  died.  He  there 
expired,  on  the  Lord’s  Day,  January  14th,  1643, 
in  the  eighty-fourth  year  of  his  age.  “  He  went 
unto  his  rest  on  the  day  of  rest  ;  a  man  of  peace, 
to  the  God  of  peace.” 


JOHN  WARD. 

This  name  closes  the  original  list  of  King 
James’s  translators.  Dr.  Ward  was  Fellow  of 
King’s  College,  Cambridge.  Fuller  gives  him 
the  strange  title  of  “  Regal,”  probably  denoting 
some  station  in  the  University.  All  that  we  gather 
of  this  Dr.  Ward  is  that  he  was  Prebendary  of 
Chichester,  and  Rector  of  Bishop’s  Waltham  in 
Hampshire. 


It  remains  for  us  to  add  a  brief  account  of 
some,  who  are  known  to  have  assisted  in  different 
stages  of  the  work.  It  has  been  shewn  that  two 
or  three  of  those  who  were  named  in  the  King’s 
commission,  died  soon  after  their  appointment. 
At  least  two  others  appear  to  have  taken  their 
places,  and  therefore  require  our  notice. 


JOHN  AGLIONBY. 

Dr.  Aglionby  was  descended  from  a  respectable 
family  in  Cumberland.  In  1583,  he  became  a 
student  in  Queen’s  College,  Oxford,  of  which 
college  he  afterwards  became  a  Fellow.  After 
receiving  ordination,  he  travelled  in  foreign  coun¬ 
tries  ;  and,  on  his  return,  was  made  chaplain  in 
ordinary  to  Queen  Elizabeth,  who  endured  no 
drone  or  dunce  about  her.  In  1601,  he  was  made 


210 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


Rector  of  Blechindon.  In  the  same  year,  he  was 
chosen  Principal  of  St.  Edmund’s  Hall,  in  the 
University  of  Oxford  ;  and  about  the  same  time, 
he  became  Rector  of  Is] ip .  On  the  accession  of 
James  I.,  he  was  appointed  chaplain  in  ordinary 
to  the  King.  Dr.  Aglionby  was  deeply  read  in 
the  fathers  and  the  schoolmen,  “  an  excellent 
linguist,”  and  an  elegant  and  instructive  preacher. 
It  is  said  of  him  by  Anthony  Wood,  in  his 
Athanse, — “  What  he  hath  published  I  find  not  ; 
however,  the  reason  why  I  set  him  down  here  is, 
that  he  had  a  ?nost  considerable  hand  in  the  Trans¬ 
lation  of  the  New  Testament,  appointed  by  King 
James  I.,  in  1604.”  Dr..  Aglionby  died  at  his 
rectory,  on  the  sixth  day  of  February,  1609,  aged 
forty-three.  In  the  chancel  of  his  church  at 
Islip,  is  a  tablet  erected  to  his  memory  by  his 
widow.  Thus  he  lived  just  long  enough  to  do 
the  best  work  he  could  have  done  in  this  world. 


LEONARD  HUTTEN. 

This  divine  was  bred  at  Westminster  School  ; 
from  whence  he  was  elected,  on  the  score  of 
merit,  to  be  a  student  of  Christ’s  Church,  one  of 


LEONARD  HUTTSN. 


211 


the  Oxford  colleges,  in  1574.  He  there  devoted 
himself,  with  unwearied  zeal,  to  the  pursuit  of 
academical  learning  in  all  its  branches.  He  took 
orders  in  due  time,  and  became  a  frequent  preach¬ 
er.  In  1599,  at  which  time  he  was  a  Bachelor  in 
Divinity  of  some  eight  years’  standing,  and  also 
Vicar  of  Flower  in  Northamptonshire,  he  was 
installed  canon  of  Christ’s  Church.  He  was 
wrell  known  as  an  “  excellent  Grecian,”  and  an 
elegant  scholar.  He  was  well  versed  in  the 
fathers,  the  schoolmen,  and  the  learned  languages, 
which  were  the  favorite  studies  of  that  day  ;  and 
he  also  investigated  with  care  the  history  of  his 
own  nation.  In  his  predilection  for  this  last- 
study  he  shewed  good  sense,  “  seeing,”  as  an  old 
writer  has  it,  “  history,  like  unto  good  men’s 
charity,  is,  though  not  to  end,  yet  to  begin,  at 
home,  and  thence  to  make  its  methodical  pro¬ 
gress  into  foreign  parts.”  Of  Dr.  Hutten  it  is 
expressly  stated  by  Wood,  that  “  he  had  a  hand 
in  the  translation  of  the  Bible.”  He  died  May 
17th,  1632,  aged  seventy-two. 

Thus  we  close  the  best  record,  which,  with 

very  great  care  and  research,  we  have  been  able 
* 

to  make,  of  this  roll  of  ancient  scholars.  Their 
united  labors,  bestowed  upon  the  common  Eng 


212 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


lish  version  of  the  Bible,  have  produced  a  volume 
which  has  exerted  a  greater  and  happier  influence 
on  the  world,  than  any  other  which  has  appeared 
since  the  original  Scriptures  themselves  were 
given  to  mankind. 

Several  other  persons  were  employed  in  vari¬ 
ous  stages  of  the  work.  In  a  letter  from  the 
King  to  the  Bishop  of  London,  dated  July  22d, 
1604,  the  monarch  says, — “We  have  appointed 
certain  learned  men,  to  the  number  of  four  and 
fifty,  for  the  translating  of  the  Bible.”  As  the 
authentic  lists  contain  but  forty-seven  names,  it 
is  presumed  the  others  were  certain  “  divines  ” 
referred  to  in  the  fifteenth  article  of  the  royal 
instrcutions  as  to  the  mode  of  prosecuting  the 
work.  In  this  fifteenth  article  it  is  provided, 
that  besides  the  several  directors  or  presidents 
of  the  different  companies,  “  three  or  four  of  the 
most  ancient  and  grave  divines  in  either  of  the 
Universities,  not  employed  in  translating,  be  as 
signed  by  the  Vice-Chancellor,  upon  conference 
with  the  rest  of  the  Heads,  to  be  overseers  of  the 
Translation,  as  well  Hebrew  as  Greek,  for  the 
better  observance  of  the  fourth  rule.”  That  rule 
required,  that  among  the  different  meanings  of 
any  word,  that  one  should  be  adopted  which  is 
most  sanctioned  by  the  Fathers,  and  is  most 


LEONARD  HUTTEN. 


213 


“agreeable  to  the  propriety  of  the  place,  and  the 
analogy  of  the  faith.”  It  is  not  known  who  those 
supervisors  were  ;  hut  if  one  of  the  Universities 
designated  three  of  them,  and  the  other  desig¬ 
nated  four ,  it  would  make  out  the  requisite  num¬ 
ber. 

When  the  six  companies  had  gone  through 
with  their  part  of  the  undertaking,  three  copies 
were  sent  to  London  ;  one  from  the  two  com¬ 
panies  at  Cambridge,  another  from  those  at  Ox¬ 
ford,  and  the  third  from  those  at  Westminster. 
Each  company  also  delegated  two  of  its  ablest 
members  to  go  up  to  London,  and  prepare  a 
single  copy  from  these  three.  When  the  Synod 
of  Dort  was  discussing  the  subject  of  preparing 
a  version  to  be  authorized  for  the  use  of  the 
Dutch  churches,  Dr.  Samuel  Ward,  one  of  the 
members,  informed  that  celebrated  body  as  to 
the  manner  in  which  that  business  had  been  con¬ 
ducted  in  England.  He  then  stated,  that  %  this 
last  single  copy  was  arranged  by  twelve  divines 
“  of  good  distinction,  and  thoroughly  conversant 
in  the  work  from  the  beginning  and  he,  as  one 
of  the  Translators,  must  have  known  the  number. 

This  oft  revised  and  completed  copy  was  then 
referred,  for  final  revision  in  preparation  for  the 
press,  to  Dr.  Smith,  one  of  the  most  active  of 


214 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


the  Translators,  and  soon  after  made  Bishop  of 
Gloucester,  and  to  Dr.  Bilson,  then  Bishop  of 
Winchester.  These  two  prepared  the  summary 
of  contents  placed  at  the  head  of  the  chapters, 
and  carefully  saw  the  work  through  the  press  in 
the  year  of  grace,  1611. 


THOMAS  BILSON. 

Dr.  Thomas  Bilson  was  of  German  parentage, 
and  related  to  the  Duke  of  Bavaria.  He  was 
horn  in  Winchester,  and  educated  in  the  school 
of  William  de  Wykeham.  He  entered  New  Col¬ 
lege,  at  Oxford,  and  was  made  a  Fellow  of  his 
College  in  1565.  He  began  to  distinguish  him¬ 
self  as  a  poet;  but,  on  receiving  ordination,  gave 
himself  wholly  to  theological  studies.  He  was 
soon  made  Prebendary  of  Winchester,  and  War¬ 
den  of  the  College  there.  In  1596,  he  was  made 
Bishop  of  Worcester;  and  three  years  later,  was 
translated  to  the  see  of  Winchester,  his  native 
place.  He  engaged  in  most  of  the  polemical 
contests  of  his  day,  as  a  stiff  partizan  of  the 
Church  of  England.  When  the  controversy 
arose  as  to  the  meaning  of  the  so  called  Apos- 


THOMAS  BILSON. 


215 


ties’  Creed,  in  asserting  the  descent  of  Christ 
into  hell,  Bishop  Bilson  defended  the  literal  sense, 
and  maintained  that  Christ  went  there,  not  to  suf¬ 
fer,  but  to  wrest  the  keys  of  hell  out  of  the 
Devil’s  hands.  For  this  doctrine  he  was  severely 
handled  by  Henry  Jacob,  who  is  often  called  the 
father  of  modern  Congregationalism,  and  also  by 
other  Puritans.  Much  feeling  was  excited  by  the 
controversy,  and  Queen  Elizabeth,  in  her  ire, 
commanded  her  good  bishop,  “  neither  to  desert 
the  doctrine,  nor  let  the  calling  which  he  bore  in 
the  Church  of  God,  be  trampled  under  foot,  by 
such  unquiet  refusers  of  truth  and  authority.” 
The  despotic  spinster  ruled  with  such  energy, 
both  in  Church  and  state,  as  to  sanction  the  say¬ 
ing,  that  “old  maids’  children  are  well  governed  !” 
Dr.  Bilson’s  most  famous  work  was  entitled  “The 
Perpetual  Government  of  Christ’s  Church,”  and 
was  published  in  1593.  It  is  still  regarded  as 

one  of  the  ablest  books  ever  written  in  behalf  of 

% 

Episcopacy.  Dr.  Bilson  died  in  1616,  at  a  good 
old  age,  and  was  buried  in  Westminster  Abbey. 
It  was  said  of  him,  that  he  “  carried  prelature  in 
his  very  aspect.”  Anthony  Wood  proclaims  him 
so  “complete  in  divinity,  so  well  skilled  in  lan¬ 
guages,  so  read  in  the  Fathers  and  Schoolmen,  so 
judicious  in  making  use  of  his  readings,  that  at 


216 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


length  he  was  found  to  be  no  longer  a  soldier,  but 
a  commander  in  chief  in  the  spiritual  warfare, 
especially  when  he  became  a  bishop  !” 


RICHARD  BANCROFT. 

In  the  Translators’  Preface,  which  used  to  be 
printed  with  all  the  earlier  editions  of  the  Bible, 
there  is  an  allusion  to  one  who  was  the  “  chief 
overseer  and  task-master  under  his  Majesty,  to 
whom  were  not  only  we,  but  also  our  whole 
Church,  much  bound.”  This  was  Dr.  Bancroft, 
then  Bishop  of  London,  on  whom  devolved  the 
duty  of  seeing  the  Kind’s  intentions  in  regard  to 
the  new  version  carried  into  effect.  Though  he 

O 

* 

had  but  little  to  do  in  the  studies  by  which  it 
was  prepared,  yet  his  general  oversight  of  all  the 
business  part  of  the  arrangements  makes  it  pro¬ 
per  to  notice  him  on  these  pages. 

He  was  born  near  Manchester,  and  educated  at 
Jesus  College,  Cambridge.  He  was  chaplain  to 
Queen  Elizabeth,  under  whom  he  became  Bishop 
of  London  in  1597.  On  the  death  of  Whitgift, 
in  1604,  he  succeeded  to  the  archbishopric  of 
Canterbury.  In  one  year  thereafter,  such  was 


RICHARD  BANCROFT. 


217 


* 

his  fury  in  pressing  conformity,  that  not  less  than 
three  hundred  ministers  were  suspended,  deprived, 
excommunicated,  imprisoned,  or  forced  to  leave 
the  country.  He  was  indeed  a  terrible  church¬ 
man,  of  a  harsh  and  stern  temper.  Bishop  Ken- 
nett,  in  his  history  of  England,  styles- him  “a 
sturdy  piece;”  and  says  “he  proceeded  with  rigor, 
severity,  and  wrath,  against  the  Puritans.”  He 
was  the  ruling  spirit  in  that  infamous  tribunal, 
the  High  Commission  Court,  a  sort  of  British 
Inquisition.  Nicholas  Fuller,  an  eminent  and 
wealthy  lawyer  of  Gray’s  Inn,  ventured  to  sue 
out  a  writ  of  Habeas  Corpus  in  behalf  of  two  of 
Bancroft’s  victims  in  that  Court,  and  argued  so 
boldly  for  the  liberation  of  his  clients,  that  Ban¬ 
croft  threw  him  also  into  prison,  where  he  lin¬ 
gered  till  his  death.  Fuller  gives  the  following 
picture  of  this  prelate: — “A  great  statesman  he 
was,  and  a  grand  champion  of  church-discipline, 
having  well  hardened  the  hands  of  his  soul,  which 
was  no  more  than  needed  for  him  who  was  to 
meddle  with  nettles  and  briars,  and  met  with 
much  opposition.  No  wonder  if  those  who  were 
silenced  by  him  in  the  church  were  loud  against 
him  in  other  places.  David  speaketh  of  ‘  poison 
under  men’s  lips.’  This  bishop  tasted  plentifully 
thereof  from  the  mouths  of  his  enemies,  till  at 


218 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


last,  (as  Mithradates,)  he  was  so  habituated  unto 
poisons,  they  became  food  unto  him.  Once  a 
gentleman,  coming  to  visit  him,  presented  him  a 
libel,  which  he  found  pasted  on  his  door;  who 
nothing  moved  thereat,  ‘  Cast  it,’  said  he,  ‘  to  an 
hundred  more  which  lie  here  on  a  heap  in  my 
chamber.’  ”  Peremptory  as  his  proceedings 
were  wdth  all  sorts  of  Dissenters,  whether  popish 
or  puritan,  he  seems  sometimes  to  have  had  a 
relenting  fit.  It  is  but  fair  to  relate  the  following 
incident.  Fuller  tells  of  an  honest  and  able 
minister,  from  whom  he  derived  the  statement, 
who  protested  to  the  Primate,  that  it  w^ent  against 
his  conscienee  to  conform  to  the  Church  in  all 
particulars.  Being  about  to  be  deprived  of  his 
living  in  consequence,  the  Archbishop  asked  him, 
— “  Which  way  will  you  live,  if  put  out  of  your 
benefice  ?”  The  minister  replied,  that  he  had  no 
way  except  to  beg,  and  throw  himself  upon  Di¬ 
vine  Providence.  “Not  that,”  said  the  Arcbishop, 
“you  shall  not  need  to  do  ;  Put  come  to  me,  and  I 
will  take  order  for  your  maintenance.”  Such 
instances  of  generosity,  however,  were  “  few  and 
far  between.” 

Imperious  as  Bancroft  was  to  his  inferiors,  he 
set  them  an  example  of  servility  to  himself,  by 
his  own  cringing  to  his  master,  the  King.  In  a 


RICHARD  BANCROFT. 


219 


despicably  flattering  oration,  in  the  Conference  at 
Hampton  Court,  he  equals  King  James  to  Solo¬ 
mon  for  wisdom,  to  Hezekiah  for  piety,  and  to 
Paul  for  learning!  Scotland  owes  his  memory  a 
grudge  for  his  unwmaried  endeavors  to  force  Epis¬ 
copacy  upon  that  people.  He  was  equally  strenu¬ 
ous  for  the  divine  rights  of  kings  and  of  diocesan 
bishops.  He  vigorously  prevented  the  alienation 
of  church-property  ;  and  succeeded  in  preventing 
that  most  greedy  and  villainous  old  courtier,  Lord 
Lauderdale,  from  swallowing  the  whole  bishop¬ 
ric  of  Durham  ! 

Dr.  Bancroft  died  in  1610,  at  the  age  of  sixty- 
six  years,  and  was  buried  at  Lambeth  Church. 
He  cancelled  his  first  will,  in  which  he  had  made 
large  bequests  to  the  church,  and  so  gave  occa¬ 
sion  to  the  following  epigram  : — 

“  He  who  never  repented  of  doing  ill, 

Repented  once  that  he  had  a  good  will.” 

In  his  second  testament,  he  left  the  large  library 
at  Lambeth  to  the  University  of  Cambridge.  Al¬ 
though  in  his  time,  the  political  sky  wTas  clear,  he 
is  said  to  have  had  the  sagacity  to  foresee  that 
coming  tempest,  which  Lord  Clarendon  calls 
“  the  great  rebellion/’  and  which  burst  upon  Eng¬ 
land  in  the  next  generation. 


220 


THE  TRANSLATORS  REVIVED. 


In  his  general  supervision  of  the  translation- 
work,  he  does  not  appear  to  have  tampered  with 
the  version,  except  in  a  very  few  passages  where 
he  insisted  upon  giving  it  a  turn  somewhat  favor¬ 
able  to  his  sectarian  notions.  But,  considering  the 
control  exercised  by  this  towering  prelate,  and 
the  fact  that  the  great  majority  of  the  Translators 
were  of  his  way  of  thinking,  it  is  quite  surprising 
that  the  work  is  not  deeply  tinged  with  their 
sentiments.  On  the  whole,  it  is  certainly  very 
far  from  being  a  sectarian  version,  like  nearly  all 
which  have  since  been  attempted  in  English.  It 
is  said  that  Bancroft  altered  fourteen  places,  so 
as  to  make  them  speak  in  phrase  to  suit  him. 
Dr.  Miles  Smith,  who  had  so  much  to  do  with 
the  work  in  all  its  stages,  is  reported  to  have 
complained  of  the  Archbishop’s  alterations.  “  But 
he  is  so  potent,”  says  the  Doctor,  “  there  is  no 
contradicting  him  !”  Two  of  those  alleged  alter¬ 
ations  are  quite  preposterous.  To  have  the  glori¬ 
ous  word  “bishopric”  occur  at  least  once  in  the 
volume,  the  office  is  conferred,  in  the  first  chap¬ 
ter  of  Acts,  on  Judas  Iscariot  !  “His  bishopric 
let  another  take.”  Many  of  the  Puritans  were 
stiffly  opposed  to  bestowing  the  name  “church,” 
which  they  regarded  as  appropriate  only  to  the 
company  of  spiritual  worshippers,  on  any  mass 


RICHARD  BANCROFT. 


221 


of  masonry  and  carpentry.*  But  Bancroft,  that 
he  might  for  once  stick  the  name  to  a  material 
building,  would  have  it  applied,  in  the  nineteenth 
chapter  of  Acts,  to  the  idols’  temples  !  “  Robbers 
of  churches  ”  are  strictly,  according  to  the  word 
in  the  original,  temple-robbers ;  and  particularly, 
in  this  case,  such  as  might  have  plundered  the 
great  temple  of  Diana  at  Ephesus.  Let  us  be 
thankful  that  the  dictatorial  prelate  tried  his  hand 
no  farther  at  emending  the  sacred  text. 


*  It  is  not  till  about  A.  D.  229,  that  we  find  any  record  of  the 
assembling  of  Christians  in  what  would  now  be  called  a  church. 
— Barton,  Ecc.  Hist.,  496. 


CONCLUSION. 


Having  now  completed  these  biographical 
sketches,  we  may  close  with  a  few  pages  relat¬ 
ing  to  the  literature  of  the  subject.  On  this,  in¬ 
deed,  a  larger  volume  might  well  be  penned. 

The  first  edition  of  the  authorized  version  was 
printed,  as  has  been  stated,  in  1611,  and  in  a 
black-letter  folio.  The  first  edition  in  quarto 
appeared  the  next  year.  The  successive  re¬ 
prints,  in  different  styles  and  sizes,  became  very 
numerous.  In  1638,  an  edition  revised  by  the 
command  of  Charles  I.,  for  the  purpose  of  typo¬ 
graphical  correction,  was  prepared  by  a  number 
of  eminent  scholars,  among  whom  were  Dr. 
Samuel  Ward  and  Mr.  Bois,  two  of  the  o  iginal 
Translators.  The  edition  in  folio  and  quarto,  re¬ 
vised  and  corrected  with  very  great  care  by  Ben¬ 
jamin  Blaney,  D.  1).,  under  the  direction  of  the 
Vice-Chancellor  of  Oxford,  and  the  Delegates  of 


CONCLUSION. 


223 


the  Clarendon  Press,  in  1769,  has  been  the 
standard  edition  ever  since ;  till  one  was  pub¬ 
lished  in  1806,  by  Eyre  and  Strahan,  printers  to 
his  Majesty.  This  impression  approaches  as 
near  as  possible  to  what  is  called  “  an  immacu¬ 
late  text,”  as  only  one  erratum,  and  that  very 
slight,  has  been  detected  in  it.  Among  so  many 
reprints  of  the  Bible,  and  in  so  many  different 
offices,  it  would  have  been  a  mass  of  miracles 
had  not  many  inaccuracies  crept  in  through  error 
and  oversight  on  the  part  of  printers  and  correct¬ 
ors  of  the  press.  As  this  is  a  point  on  which 
every  reader  of  the  Bible  must  feel  some  anxiety, 
it  may  be  well  to  make  the  following  statement. 
A  very  able  Committee  of  the  American  Bible 
Society,  spent  some  three  years  in  a  diligent  and 
laborious  comparison  of  recent  copies  of  the  best 
edition  of  the  American  Bible  Society,  and  of  the 
four  leading  British  editions,  namely,  those  of 
London,  Oxford,  Cambridge,  and  Edinburgh,  and 
also  of  the  original  edition  of  1611.  The  num¬ 
ber  of  variations  in  the  text  and  punctuation  of 
these  six  copies  was  found  to  fall  but  little  short 
of  twenty-four  thousand.  A  vast  amount  !  Quite 
enough  to  frighten  us,  till  we  read  the  Commit¬ 
tee’s  assurance,  that  “  of  all  this  great  number, 
there  is  not  one  which  mars  the  integrity  of  the 


224 


CONCLUSION. 


text ,  or  affects  any  doctrine  or  precept  of  the  Bi¬ 
ble”  As  this,  however,  is  a  point  in  which  the 
minutest  accuracy  is  to  be  sought,  that  Commit¬ 
tee  have  prepared  an  edition  wherein  these  varia¬ 
tions  are  set  right,  to  serve  as  a  standard  copy 
for  the  Society  to  print  by  in  future. 

Infinite  is  the  debt  of  gratitude  which  the  world 
owes  to  its  Maker  for  the  Bible.  Scarcely  less 
is  its  debt  to  his  goodness,  in  raising  up  compe¬ 
tent  instruments  for  its  translation  into  different 
tongues,  unlocking  its  treasures  to  enrich  the  na¬ 
tions.  This  matter  is  finely  touched  by  Dr. 
Field,  a  divine  of  the  seventeenth  century,  in 
whose  writings  that  great  critic,  S.  T.  Coleridge, 
was  wont  to  take  a  deep  and  admiring  delight. 
“  That  most  excellent  light  of  Christian  wisdom, 
revealed  in  the  sacred  books  of  the  Divine  Ora¬ 
cles,  is  incomparable  and  peerless,  and  whereup¬ 
on  all  others  do  depend ;  the  bright  beams  of 
which  heavenly  light  do  show  unto  us  the  ready 
way  to  eternal  happiness,  amidst  the  sundry  turn¬ 
ings  and  dangerous  windings  of  this  life.  An*d 
lest  either  the  strangeness  of  the  languages 
wherein  these  Holy  Books  were  written,  or  the 
deepness  of  the  mysteries  or  the  multiplicity  of 
hidden  senses  contained  in  them,  should  any  way 
hinder  us  from  the  clear  view  and  perfect  behold 


CONCLUSION. 


225 


ing  of  the  heavenly  brightness  ;  God  hath  called 
and  assembled  into  his  Church  out  of  all  the 
nations  of  the  world,  and  out  of  all  people  that 
dwell  under  the  arch  of  heaven,  men  abounding 
in  all  secular  learning  and  knowledge ,  and  filled 
with  the  understanding  of  holy  things ,  which 
might  turn  these  Scriptures'  and  Books  of  God 
into  the  tongues  of  every  nation  ;  and  might  un¬ 
seal  this  Book  so  fast  clasped  and  sealed,  and 
manifest  and  open  the  mysteries  therein  con¬ 
tained,  not  only  by  lively  voice,  but  by  writ¬ 
ings  to  be  carried  down  to  all  posterities.  From 
hence,  as  from  the  pleasant  and  fruitful  fields 
watered  with  the  silver  dew  of  Hermo,  the 
people  of  God  are  nourished  with  all  saving  food. 
Hence  the  thirst  of  languishing  souls  is  restin- 
guished,  as  from  the  most  pure  fountains  of  liv¬ 
ing  water,  and  the  everlasting  waters  of  Para¬ 
dise.” 

It  is  of  the  highest  importance,  that  the  Bible 
in  English  should  be  placed  in  the  hands  of  all 
who  may  be  able  to  read  it.  This  is  due  to  the 
excellence  of  the  translation  itself;  and  much 
more  to  the  value  of  its  contents.  To  the  in¬ 
quirer  after  religious  truth,  the  Scriptures  stand 
in  the  same  relation,  as  the  works  of  nature  stand 
in  to  the  inquirer  after  scientific  truth.  The  nat 


226 


CONCLUSION. 


ural  philosopher  who  should  shut  his  eyes  upon 
all  the  facts  and  phenomena  of  the  material  uni¬ 
verse,  could  not  fall  into  greater  blunders  and 
follies,  than  the  theologian  who  closes  the  lids  of 
his  Bible.  Without  this  blessed  Book,  Protest¬ 
antism  is  nothing.  Says  Luther,  a  most  enthusi¬ 
astic  student  and  translator  of  the  Bible, — “This 
volume  alone  deserves  to  occupy  the  tongue,  the 
heart,  the  eyes,  the  ears,  the  hearts  of  all.”*  And 
again, — “While  the  Word  of  God  flourishes,  all 
things  flourish  in  the  Church. t 

The  refusal  of  Popery  to  allow  the  common 
people  free  access  to  the  Scriptures  in  their  ver¬ 
nacular  tongues,  condemns  their  divine  Author 
for  not  having  originally  inspired  his  prophets 
and  apostles  to  write  them  in  dead  languages, 
and  unknown  tongues.  God  was  not  afraid  to 
give  the  Old  Testament  to  the  Hebrews  in  their 
mother  tongue  ;  nor  to  publish  the  New  Testa¬ 
ment  in  the  Greek  speech,  which  was  then  more 
widely  spoken  and  understood  than  any  other. 
Has  it  ever  been  supposed,  that  the  Churches  at 
Corinth  and  Colosse,  for  instance,  suffered  any 


*  Solus  hie  liber  omnium  lingua,  manfl,  oculis,  auribus,  cordi- 
bus.  versaretur. 

+  Florente  verbo,  omnia  florent  in  Ecclesid. 


CONCLUSION. 


227 


detriment  in  receiving  those  inspired  Epistles 
from  the  Apostle  Paul  in  a  language  familiar  to 
all  their  members  ?  Why,  then,  may  not  the 
people  of  modern  Italy  safely  read  the  same 
writings,  rendered  into  their  own  tongue  wherein 
they  were  born? 

For  many  centuries,  while  the  Greek  was  a 
living  and  widely  diffused  language,  the  New 
Testament  in  its  original  form  was  as  freely  cir¬ 
culated  and  read  as  it  could  be  in  manuscript. 
And  the  early  Latin  versions  were  also  industri¬ 
ously  diffused  among  old  and  young  in  the  Roman 
empire.  We  have  a  letter  full  of  godly  counsels, 
written  by  a  bishop  Theonas  to  Lucian,  chief 
chamberlain  to  the  Emperor  Dioclesian  before 
the  latter  had  become  a  bitter  persecutor.  The¬ 
onas  says, —  “  Let  not  one  day  go  by  without 
reading  at  a  set  time  some  portion  of  Holy  Writ, 
and  meditating  thereon.  Neglect  not  the  read¬ 
ing  of  the  Bible.  Nothing  so  nourishes  the  heart, 
and  enriches  the  mind,  as  the  reading  of  the 
Bible.”*  Tn  a  most  beautiful  sketch  of  the  re¬ 
ligious  life  of  any  pious  husband  and  wife,  Ter- 
tullian  says, — “ They  read  the  Scriptures  together, 


*  This  admirable  letter  is  to  be  foupd  in  D’Achery’s  Spicilegi 
tun,  III.  298. 


228 


CONCLUSION. 


they  pray  together,  they  fast  together,  they  mu¬ 
tually  instruct,  exhort,  and  sustain  each  other.”* 
The  sermons  and  other  treatises  of  Augustine 
abound  in  exhortations  to  his  hearers  of  every 
degree,  to  make  themselves  familiar  with  the 
contents  of  the  Sacred  Writings.  In  one  place, 
he  urges  them  to  this,  that  they  may  be  able  to 
give  a  reason  of  the  hope  that  is  in  them  to  any 
of  the  inquiring  or  the  sceptical  from  among  the 
heathen  who  may  apply  to  them  for  instruction, 
rather  than  to  the  ecclesiastics.!  Like  Chrysos¬ 
tom,  Augustine  often  closed  his  sermon  with  some 
important  question  to  be  discussed  in  his  next 
preaching,  in  order  to  excite  his  hearers  to  reflect 
upon  the  subject,  to  search  the  Scriptures  in  re¬ 
gard  to  it,  and  talk  it  over  among  themselves. 
As  many  were  unable  to  read,  the  rulers  of  the 
church  took  care  that  there  should  be  a  daily 
reading  of  the  Scriptures  in  course  for  their 
benefit.  Alluding  to  this,  Augustine  says, — 
“  Since  many  of  you  cannot  read,  either  because 
you  have  no  time,  or  know  not  how,  such  must 
not  forget  to  gain  the  doctrine  of  salvation  at 
least  through  diligent  hearing.”!  In  another 


*  In  Tsai.  90,  Serna.  II. 
t  Ad  Uxorem,  Ep.  II.  8. 
X  Serm.  105.  §  2. 


CONCLUSION. 


229 


place  he  says, — “  The  weak  and  the  strong  both 
drink  of  the  same  stream,  and  quench  their  thirst. 
The  water  saith  not,  ‘  I  am  proper  for  the  weak  !’ 
— thus  repulsing  the  strong.  Neither  saith  it, — 
‘  Let  the  strong  draw  near  ;  but  if  the  weak  com- 
eth,  he  shall  be  swept  away  by  the  force  of  the 
stream.’  It  flows  so  sure  and  so  gentle,  as  to 
quench  the  thirst  of  the  strong,  without  frightening 
the  weak  away, — To  whom  speaks  the  resound¬ 
ing  Psalm  ?  and  who  fexclaims, — ‘  It  is  too  high 
for  me !’  What  the  Psalm  resounds,  be  it  even 
of  the  deepest  mysteries,  it  so  resounds,  that  the 
very  children  are  delighted  to  hear,  and  the  un¬ 
learned  draw  near,  and  pour  out  the  full  heart  in 
the  song.*”  Ambrose,  the  famous  pastor  of  Mi¬ 
lan,  exhorted  his  congregation  to  the  daily  study 
of  the  Scriptures.  “  In  such  studies,”  he  says, 
“  the  soul  is  quickened  by  the  word  of  God.  This 
is  the  principle  of  life  in  our  souls  whereby  they 
are  fed  and  ruled.  The  more  the  word  of  God 
abounds  in  our  souls,  and  is  there  conceived  and 
understood,  the  more  their  life  abounds;  and,  on 
the  other  hand,  as  the  word  of  God  is  wanting 
there,  so  their  life  decays.”!  Jerome  also  con- 


*  In  Psal.  103,  Serra.  III.  §  4. 
f  In  Psal.  113,  Serm.  VII.  §  7. 


230 


CONCLUSION. 


stantly  stirs  up  his  readers  to  diligent  study  of 
the  Scriptures.  Thus  he  commends  Lseta,  a 
Roman  lady,  for  making  her  daughters  early  con¬ 
versant  with  them.  “Instead  of  jewels  and  silks, 
let  them  the  rather  delight  themselves  in  the 
Holy  Scriptures,  never  having  the  gospels  out  of 
their  hands,”  and  “  absorbing  the  Acts  and  Epistles 
of  the  Apostles  with  all  the  eagerness  of  the 
soul.”*  But  perhaps  none  of  the  Fathers  has 
spoken  on  this  point  so  often,  so  fully,  so  earn¬ 
estly,  as  the  eloquent  Chrysostom,  who  preached 
in  the  very  language  in  which  the  New  Testa¬ 
ment  was  originally  written.  Costly  as  manu¬ 
scripts  then  were,  he  insists  that  even  the  poorer 
class  should  possess  copies  of  the  Scriptures,  as 
well  as  of  the  tools  used  in  their  worldly  call 
ings.  He  often,  both  in  conversation  and  preach 
ing,  exhorted  his  hearers  not  to  be  content  with 
what  they  heard  read  from  the  Scriptures  at 
church,  but  to  read  them  with  their  families  at 
home.f 

So  long  ago  as  the  fourteenth  century,  when  the 


*  Epis.  107. 

f  Eor  references  on  this  point,  consult  Chrysostom’s  Homilies 
III.  and  IY.  de  Statuis  ;  Horn.  XI.  and  XXIX.  in  Genes.;  Ser.  III. 
and  IV.  de  Lazaro  ;  Horn.  I.  and  II.  in  Matt.;  Horn.  X.  XI.  XXX. 
XXXI.  XXXII.  and  LVIII.  in  Joan.;  Horn.  XIX.  in  Acta.;  Horn. 
I.  ad  Rom.;  and  IX.  ad  Coloss. 


CONCLUSION. 


231 


popish  bishops  in  the  House  of  Lords  brought  in 
a  motion  to  suppress  the  use  of  the  Bible,  as  then 
translated  into  English  by  Wiclif,  they  were  stiffly 
opposed  by  “  old  John  of  Gaunt,  time-honored 
Lancaster.”  This  noble  duke  argued  earnestly 
for  the  free  circulation  of  the  Scriptures.  He 
was  seconded  by  others  who  said,  that  “  if  the 
gospel  by  its  being  translated  into  English,  was 
the  occasion  of  men’s  running  into  error,  they 
might  know  that  there  were  more  heretics  to  be 
found  among  the  Latins,  than  among  the  people 
of  any  other  language.  For  that  the  decretals 
reckoned  no  fewer  than  sixty-six  Latin  heretics; 
and  so  the  gospel  must  not  be  read  in  Latin, 
which  yet  the  opposers  of  its  English  translation 
allowed.”  The  debate  was  closed  by  throwing 
the  bill  out  of  the  house.  And  well  might  it  be 
discarded.  How  much  less  than  blasphemy  is  it 
to  hold  that  it  is  dangerous  that  a  book  should  be 
generally  circulated  and  read,  which  has  God  for 
its  author,  and  his  eternal  truth  as  its  subject- 
matter,  and  which  he  has  commanded  all  men  to 
obey  as  the  condition  of  their  everlasting  sal¬ 
vation  ? 

Robert  Boyle,  that  devout  son  of  science,  on 
whom  first  the  mantle  of  Lord  Bacon  fell,  has 
said, — “I  can  scarce  think  any  pains  misspent 


232 


CONCLUSION. 


that  bring  me  in  solid  evidence  of  that  great 
truth,  that  the  Scripture  is  the  word  of  God, 
which  is  indeed  the  Grand  Fundamental. — And 
I  use  the  Scriptures,  not  as  an  arsenal  to  be  re¬ 
sorted  to  only  for  arms  and  weapons  to  defend 
this  or  that  party,  or  to  defeat  its  enemies  ;  hut 
as  a  matchless  Temple,  where  I  delight  to  be,  to 
contemplate  the  beauty,  the  symmetry,  and  the 
magnificence  of  the  structure,  and  to  increase 
my  awe,  and  to  excite  my  devotion  to  the  Deity 
there  preached  and  adored.”  Another  scholar 
of  the  highest  genius,  S.  T.  Coleridge,  who  went 
as  far  in  metaphysical  studies  as  did  Boyle  in 
the  pursuit  of  natural  philosophy,  has  spoken  in 
the  like  experimental  manner  of  the  Bible, — “  I 
can  truly  affirm  of  myself,  that  my  studies  have 
been  profitable  and  availing  to  me,  only  so  far  as 
I  have  endeavored  to  use  all  my  other  knowledge 
as  a  glass,  enabling  me  to  receive  more  light  in  a 
wider  field  of  vision  from  the  Word  of  God.”* 

As  to  the  Bible  in  its  English  form,  it  is  safe 
to  assume  the  impossibility  of  gathering  a  more 
competent  body  of  translators,  than  those  who 
did  the  work  so  well  under  King  James’s  com¬ 
mission.  Since  then,  a  great  many  revisions  of 


*  Literary  Remains,  III.  139. 
9 


CONCLUSION. 


233 


particular  books  in  the  Bible  have  been  published 
in  English,  and  some  of  them  embodying  the  best 
labors  of  the  most  distinguished  scholars.  But 
who  has  dreamed  of  substituting  so  much  as  one 
of  them  all,  in  the  place  of  such  books  as  they 
now  stand  in  the  common  version?  The  late 
Professor  Stuart  was  a  man  of  learning  and  piety, 
whose  candor  ran  almost  to  excess.  He  prepared 
elaborate  translations  of  the  Epistles  to  the  Rom¬ 
ans  and  to  the  Hebrews  ;  but  while  we  gladly 
use  them  as  helps  toward  the  better  understand¬ 
ing  of  those  portions  of  the  Bible,  who  would 
think  of  using  them  for  devotional  purposes, 
either  to  settle  his  faith,  or  to  stir  up  its  activities? 
An  edition  of  the  Bible,  with  those  labors  of  that 
celebrated  Professor  substituted  for  those  in  the 
common  editions,  would  be  a  strange  affair  indeed  ! 
It  is  quite  certain  that  no  portion  of  the  work  has 
been  done  over  again  since  1611,  by  any  divine 
of  England  or  America,  in  a  way  which,  by  gen¬ 
eral  consent  of  the  Christian  community,  could 
supplant  the  corresponding  portion  as  it  stands  in 
our  family  and  pulpit  Bibles. 

And  what  has  not  been  done  by  the  most  able 
and  best  qualified  divines,  is  not  likely  to  be  done 
by  obscure  pedagogues,  broken-down  parsons, 
and  sectaries  of  a  single  idea,  and  that  a  wrong 


234 


CONCLUSION. 


one, — who,  from  different  quarters,  are  talking 
big  and  loud  of  their  “  amended,”  “improved,” 
and  “  only  correct”  and  reliable  re-translations, 
and  getting  up  “American  and  Foreign  Bible 
Unions”  to  print  their  sophomorical  performances. 
How  do  such  shallow  adventurers  appear  along 
side  of  those  venerable  men  whose  lives  have  been 
briefly  sketched  in  the  foregoing  pages  !  The 
newly-risen  versionists,  with  all  their  ambitious 
and  pretentious  vaunts  are  not  worthy  to  “  carry 
satchels”  alter  those  masters  of  ancient  learning. 
Imagine  our  greenish  contemporaries  shut  up  with 
an  Andrews,  a  Reynolds,  a  Ward,  and  a  Bois,  com¬ 
paring  notes  on  the  meaning  of  the  original  Scrip¬ 
tures!  It  would  soon  be  found,  that  all  the  aid  our 
poor  moderns  could  render  would  be  in  snuff¬ 
ing  the  candles, — and  these,  it  is  to  be  feared, 
would  too  often  be  snuffed  out !  It  were  better  for 
them  to  be  framing  a  Hamlet  that  shall  supersede 
the  master-piece  of  the  “bard  of  Avon;”  or  a 
“  Paradise  Lost  ”  that  shall  throw  the  great  epic  of 
the  seventeenth  century  into  the  shades  of  obliv¬ 
ion.  Let  tinkers  stick  to  the  baser  metals  ;  and 
heaven  forefend  that  they  should  clout  the  golden 
vessels  of  the  sanctuary  with  their  clumsy  patches. 
When  one  of  these  nibbling  critics  tries  his  puny 
teeth  upon  this  glorious  and  indestructible  version, 


CONCLUSION. 


235 


it  seems  as  unnatural  as  that  scaring  portent 
mentioned  in  “  Macbeth 

“A  falcon,  tcnvering  in  her  pride  of  place, 

Was  by  a  mousing  owl  hawked  at,  and  pecked.’  ’ 

But  it  is  not  well  to  he  too  much  vexed  at  these 
petty  annoyances,  which  will  speedily  pass  away 
and  be  forgotten,  as  has  been  the  fate  of  all  pre¬ 
vious  pests  of  the  kind. 

Not  that  the  utmost  verbal  perfection  is  claimed 
for  the  English  Bible  as  it  now  stands.  Some  of 
its  words  have,  in  the  lapse  of  time,  gone  out  of 
common  use;  some  have  suffered  a  gradual 
change  of  meaning ;  and  some  which  were  in 
unexceptionable  use  two  hundred  years  ago,  are 
now  considered  as  distasteful  and  indelicate. 
But  the  number  of  such  words  is  very  small, 
considering  the  great  size  and  age  of  the  volume  ; 
and  the  retaining  of  them  causes  but  little  incon¬ 
venience,  compared  with  the  disadvantages  of 
wholesale  projectors  of  amendment  volunteered 
by  incompetent  and  irresponsible  schemers.  If 
ever  the  time  shall  come  for  a  new  revision  of 
the  Translation,  let  it  be  done  with  the  care  and 
solemnity  which  marked  the  labors  of  King 
James’s  commissioners;  and  above  all,  let  it  be 
done  by  men  who  shall  know  what  they  are  about, 


236 


CONCLUSION. 


and  how  it  ought  to  be  done.  It  will  be  a  vast  un¬ 
dertaking,  affecting  the  dearest  interests  of  ages 
of  time,  and  millions  upon  millions  of  immortals. 

Meanwhile,  it  may  help  our  contentment  with 
the  Bible  as  we  have  it,  to  notice  what  opinions 
have  been  expressed  as  to  its  merits  by  the  ablest 
judges  of  a  performance  of  this  nature.  These 
testimonials  might  be  swelled  to  the  size  of  a 
volume,  but  a  few  will  be  sufficient  for  the  pre¬ 
sent  occasion.  George  Hakewills,  D.  D.,  Arch¬ 
deacon  of  Surrey,  thus  speaks  to  the  point. — 
“Of  all  the  auncient  Fathers  but  only  two, 
(among  the  Latines  St.  Hierome,  and  Origen 
among  the  Grecians,)  are  found  to  have  excelled 
in  the  orientall  languages  ;  this  last  centenary 
having  afforded  more  skilfull  men  that  way  than 
the  other  hfteene  since  Christ.*”  The  famous 
John  Selden,  in  his  Table-talk,  thus  utters  his 
opinion, — “  The  English  translation  of  the  Bible 
is  the  best  translation  in  the  world,  and  renders 
the  sense  of  the  original  best.”  Dr.  Brian  Wal¬ 
ton,  the  learned  editor  of  a  Bible,  in  nine  differ¬ 
ent  languages,  and  six  tail-folios,  assigns  the  first 
rank  among  European  translations  to  the  com¬ 
mon  English  version.  Dr.  Edward  Pococke,  that 

*  An  Apologie  or  Declaration  of  the  Power  and  Providence  oi 
God.  1627. 


CONCLUSION. 


237 


profound  Orientalist,  in  the  Preface  to  his  Com¬ 
mentary  on  Micah,  speaks  of  our  translation  as 
“  being  such,  and  so  agreeable  to  the  original,  as 
that  we  might  well  choose  among  others  to  follow 
it,  were  it  not  our  own,  and  established  by  autho¬ 
rity  among  us.”  Dr.  Middleton,  Bishop  of  Cal¬ 
cutta,  and  for  ever  famous  for  his  work  on  the 
Greek  Article,  says, — “  The  style  of  our  present 
version  is  incomparably  superior  to  any  thing 
which  might  be  expected  from  the  finical  and  per¬ 
verted  taste  of  our  own  age.  It  is  simple,  it  is 
harmonious,  it  is  energetic  ;  and,  which  is  of  no 
small  importance,  use  has  made  it  familiar,  and 
time  has  rendered  it  sacred.”* 

One  Bellamy  having  made  a  blind  and  rabid 
attack  on  our  version,  in  crying  up  some  oppo¬ 
sition-wares  of  his  own,  he  was  thus  chastised  in 
the  London  Quarterly; — “He  has  no  relish  or 
perception  of  the  exquisite  simplicity  of  the 
Original,  no  touch  of  that  fine  feeling,  that  pious 
awe,  which  led  his  venerable  predecessors  to  in¬ 
fuse  into  their  version  as  much  of  the  Hebrew 
idiom  as  was  consistent  with  the  perfect  purity 
of  our  own  ;  a  taste  and  feeling  which  have  given 
perennial  beauty  and  majesty  to  the  English 


*  Doctrine  of  the  Greek  Article,  page  328. 


238 


CONCLUSION. 


tongue. ”*  Dr.  White,  Professor  of  Arabic  at  Ox¬ 
ford,  to  other  strong  commendations  adds  ; — 
“  Upon  the  whole,  the  national  churches  of  Eu¬ 
rope  will  have  abundant  reason  to  be  satisfied, 
when  their  versions  of  Scripture  shall  approach  in 
point  of  accuracy,  purity,  and  sublimity,  to  the 
acknowledged  excellence  of  our  English  transla¬ 
tion.”  Dr.  John  Taylor,  of  Norwich,  a  very 
learned  man,  but  unhappily  an  Arian,  thus  de¬ 
livers  his  testimony; — “  You  may  rest  fully  satis¬ 
fied,  that  as  our  English  translation  is,  in  itself, 
by  far  the  most  excellent  book  in  our  language, 
so  it  is  a  pure  and  plentiful  fountain  of  divine 
knowledge,  giving  a  true,  clear,  and  full  account 
of  the  divine  dispensations,  and  of  the  gospel  of 
our  salvation;  insomuch  that  whoever  studieth 
the  Bible,  the  English  Bible ,  is  sure  of  gaining 
that  knowledge  and  faith,  which,  if  duly  applied 
to  the  heart  and  conversation,  will  infallibly  guide 
him  to  eternal  life.”f  To  this  testimony  let  there 
be  added  that  of  Dr.  Alexander  Geddes,  a  learned 
minister  of  the  Church  of  Rome,  who  himself 
also  attempted  a  re-translation  of  the  Bible  into 
English; — “The  highest  eulogiums  have  been 


*  I. ondon  Quarterly  Review,  No.  XXNYIH.  p.  4 55. 
t  Scheme,  &c.,  Chap.  XI.  In  Watson’s  Collection  of  Theologi¬ 
cal  Tracts.  Yol.  I.  p.  188. 


CONCLUSION. 


239 


made  on  the  translation  of  James  the  First,  both 
by  our  own  writers  and  by  foreigners.  And,  in¬ 
deed,  if  accuracy,  fidelity,  and  the  strictest  atten¬ 
tion  to  the  letter  of  the  text,  be  supposed  to  con¬ 
stitute  the  qualities  of  an  excellent  version,  this 
of  all  versions,  must,  in  general,  be  accounted 
the  most  excellent.  Every  sentence,  every  word, 
every  syllable,  every  letter  and  point,  seem  to 
have  been  weighed  with  the  nicest  exactitude; 
and  expressed,  either  in  the  text,  or  margin,  with 
the  greatest  precision.  Pagninus  himself  is 
hardly  more  literal ;  and  it  was  well  remarked 
by  Robertson,  above  a  hundred  years  ago,  that  it 
may  serve  as  a  Lexicon  of  the  Hebrew  language, 
as  well  as  for  a  translation.”! 

Dr.  Adam  Clarke,  the  Wesleyan,  in  the  Gen¬ 
eral  Preface  to  his  Commentary  on  the  Bible, 
having  spoken  of  the  common  version  as  superior 
in  accuracy  and  fidelity  to  the  other  European 
versions,  adds  the  following  declaration  ; — “  Nor 
is  this  its  only  praise ;  the  translators  have  seized 
the  very  spirit  and  soul  of  the  original,  and  ex¬ 
pressed  this  almost  every  where  with  pathos  and 
energy.  Bssides,  our  translators  have  not  only 


+  Prospectus  of  a  New  Translation,  &c.  Page  92.  The  hint  of 
Robertson  has  since  been  realized  byBagster’s  Englishman’s  He¬ 
brew  and  Greek  Concordance  to  the  Holy  Bible. 


240 


CONCLUSION. 


made  a  standard  translation,  but  they  have  made 
their  translation  the  standard  of  our  language.,, 

The  late  Professor  Stuart,  whose  mind  was  so 
constituted  that  he  neither  clung  to  antiquity,  nor 
shrank  from  novelty,  thus  gives  his  opinion  ; — 
“Ours  is,  on  the  whole,  a  most  noble  production 
for  the  time  in  which  it  was  made.  The  divines 
of  that  day  wrere  very  different  Hebrew  scholars 
from  what  most  of  their  successors  have  been,  in 
England  or  Scotland.  With  the  exception  of 
Bishop  Lowdh’s  classic  work  upon  Isaiah,  no 
other  effort  at  translating,  among  the  English  di¬ 
vines,  will  compare,  either  with  respect  to  taste, 
judgment,  or  sound  understanding  of  the  Hebrew, 
with  the  authorized  version.”*  Not  to  crowd 
the  court  with  witnesses  in  superfluous  numbers, 
let  us  close  the  taking  of  testimony  on  this  point 
with  the  words  of  the  grave  and  judicious  Tho¬ 
mas  Hartwell  Horne,  in  his  invaluable  Introduc¬ 
tion  to  the  Critical  Study  and  Knowledge  of  the 
Holy  Scriptures  ; — “We  cannot  but  call  to  mind 
with  gratitude  and  admiration,  the  integrity,  wis¬ 
dom,  fidelity,  and  learning  of  the  venerable  trans¬ 
lators,  ot  whose  pious  labors  we  are  now  reaping 


*  Dissertation  on  Studying  the  Original  Languages  of  the  Bible. 

Page  61. 


CONCLUSION. 


241 


the  benefit ;  who,  while  their  reverence  for  the 
Holy  Scriptures  induced  them  to  be  as  literal  as 
they  could,  to  avoid  obscurity  have  been  ex¬ 
tremely  happy  in  the  simplicity  and  dignity  of 
their  expressions  ;  and  who,  by  their  adherence  to 
the  Hebrew  idiom,  have  at  once  enriched  and 
adorned  our  language.” 

We  may  well  be  satisfied  and  devoutly  thank¬ 
ful  for  an  English  Bible  whose  sufficiency  and  ex¬ 
cellence  has  such  ample  vouchers.  And  if  we 
were  not  content,  it  is  almost  frightful  to  think 
of  the  immense  multitude  of  printed  copies  which 
must  be  superseded,  before  any  new  version  can 
be  generally  adopted.  Since  the  present  century 
began,  the  Bible  Societies  in  Great  Britain  and 
America  have  published  some  thirty-seven  millions 
of  copies  of  the  present  version  ;  and  according 
to  the  laborious  computations  of  Anderson,  a  still 
greater  number  have  been  issued  on  private  sale. 
This  vast  amount  is  increasing  more  rapidly  than 
ever.  No  book  is  so  abundantly  sold,  or  so  freely 
given  away.  Doubtless,  allowing  largely  for 
wear  and  tear,  there  are  at  least  twenty-five  mil 
lions  of  these  copies  now  in  actual  use  and  ser¬ 
vice.  The  notion  of  displacing  all  these  by 
copies  of  another,  and  especially  if  it  be  a  very 


& 


I 


242 


COJNCUUSION. 


different  translation,  seems  to  be  rather  visionary, 
to  say  the  least. 

It  ought  to  be  considered,  too,  that  the  lan¬ 
guage  of  the  current  version  is  thoroughly  blended 
with  the  whole  religious  literature  of  the  English 
tongue.  It  also  pervades  the  religious  experience, 
and  expresses  the  devotional  feelings,  of  all  the 
Christians  who  speak  that  tongue.  Truly,  the 
introduction  of  a  very  different  translation, — and 
if  not  very  different,  there  could  be  no  reason  suffi¬ 
cient  to  justify  such  a  sweeping  change, — must 
have  a  very  disconcerting  effect  upon  the  public 
mind,  and  give  rise  to  an  infinity  of  vexations.  The 
present  translation  has  been,  and  is,  the  text-book 
for  millions  of  Sabbath-School  pupils,  and  re¬ 
ligious  inquirers  ;  and  is  hallowed  by  associations 
so  tender  and  sacred,  that  the  attempt  to  discard 
it  will  seem  to  multitudes  of  devout  men  and 
women  but  little  better  than  sacrilege.  It  was 
sufficient,  they  will  say,  for  the  salvation  of  our 
godly  parents  and  others  of  our  sainted  friends, — 
and,  with  the  blessing  of  their  God  and  our  God, 
it  shall  suffice  for  ours. 

Especially  objectionable  must  be  the  attempt 
to  furnish  translations  for  the  use  of  the  various 
Christian  sects.  Our  common  version,  though 
prepared  by  members  of  the  Church  of  England, 


CONCLUSION. 


243 


was  prepared  before  dissent  from  that  Church 
had  became  so  very  extensive  and  earnest.  Hence 
it  was,  on  the  whole,  drawn  up  in  a  spirit  remark¬ 
ably  free  from  sectarianism  ;  and  all  Protestant 
denominations,  ever  since,  have  confidently  ap¬ 
pealed  to  it,  as  to  an  impartial  arbiter.  To  these 
denominations,  it  has  always  been  the  common 
standard,  around  wdiich  they  have  rallied  against 
the  usurpations  and  impostures  of  Rome.  Now, 
wTere  each  denomination  to  issue  for  itself  a  new 
translation,  modified  to  suit  the  peculiar  opinions 
of  the  sect,  it  would  place  them  all  in  the  same 
position  toward  each  other,  as  that  wThich  they 
together  occupy  toward  Rome.  It  would  cut  oil 
all  mutual  sympathy,  by  leaving  no  common  “rule 
of  faith  ”  which  the  mass  of  the  people  could 
consult  or  apply.  Each  class  of  believers  having 
its  own  rule  of  faith,  there  would  be  as  many  dis¬ 
tinct  Christian  religions  as  professed  versions  of 
the  Bible.  This  multiplication  of  strictly  and 
irreconcilably  sectarian  Bibles,  each  acknowl¬ 
edged  only  by  the  party  from  which  it  emanated, 
would  proclaim  a  triumphant  jubilee  to  scepticism 
and  infidelity.  If  only  some  sects  were  to  pur 
sue  such  a  course,  it  must  prove  a  suicidal  policy 
to  them  ;  for  it  would  be  a  virtual  and  practical 
confession  that  our  long  received  and  thoroughly 


244 


CONCLUSION. 


impartial  translation  is  not  in  their  favor,  and  that 
they  could  not  sustain  themselves  except  by  a 
new  version  so  framed  as  specially  to  help  their 
cause.  The  denominations  retaining  the  author 
ized  translation  would  secure  the  whole  benefit 
of  its  celebrity,  its  authority,  and  its  mighty  hold 
upon  the  affection  and  reverence  of  the  Anglo 
Saxon  race. 

For  nearly  two  hundred  and  fifty  years  this 
translation  has  been  in  common  use.  During  that 
time,  it  has  had  free  course  and  circulation  among 
successive  generations  speaking  the  English 
tongue.  It  was  made  ready  in  good  season  to 
cross  the  Atlantic  with  the  first  English  colonists 
of  America.  During  that  time  the  reigning  dy¬ 
nasty  of  England  has  changed  once  and  again, 
America  has  become  the  greatest  of  republics, 
science  has  been  even  more  often  and  fully  revo¬ 
lutionized  than  politics,  the  arts  of  life  have 
almost  created  society  anew  by  marvellous  inven¬ 
tions  and  discoveries,  popular  intelligence  has 
brightened  from  its  dawnings  into  the  broad  light 
of  day,  philosophy  has  restlessly  traversed  a 
thousand  circles  of  inquiry  and  speculation,  and 
theology  has  been  rushing  backward  and  forward 
through  successive  alternations,  like  a  ship  beating 
into  port  against  wind  and  tide,  and  losing  on  one 


CONCLUSION. 


245 


tack,  what  may  have  been  gained  on  the  other. 
And  yet  this  glorious  version,  alone  unchanged, 
remains  unrivalled.  Though,  here  and  there, 
some  have  murmured  and  threatened,  and  soma 
have  complained  and  reviled  aloud,  and  some 
have  put  forth  their  skill  in  “  improved”  or  “  cor¬ 
rected”  versions,  they  have  been  wholly  unheeded 
by  the  great  body  of  readers.  The  common  ver¬ 
sion  was  never  more  popular  than  it  is  now.  It 
is  in  greater  demand,  more  abundantly  supplied 
by  the  press,  more  elaborately  adorned  by  Chris¬ 
tian  art,  and  more  widely  spread  abroad  than  ever 
before.  This  among  a  people  so  intelligent  and 
cultivated,  and  so  prone  to  progress,  is  an  unex¬ 
ampled  popularity.  There  must  be  inherent  and 
pre-eminent  excellence  in  a  work  which  keeps 
such  firm  hold  upon  the  esteem  and  veneration  of 
a  race  of  men,  who  show  but  little  conservatism 
as  to  any  other  matter  of  general  concernment. 
While  all  else  has  been  falling  away,  the  word 
of  the  Lord  “  liveth  and  abideth  for  ever.” 

This  enduring  popularity  may  in  part  be  ae 
counted  for  by  the  personal  character,  the  vast 
scholarship,  and  exalted  piety,  of  its  authors. 
The  way  had  been  well  prepared  for  them  by 
a  succession  of  older  translations  and  revisions 
so  excellent,  that  our  Translators  modestly  say,  in 


246 


CONCLUSION. 


their  Preface,  that  they  did  not  “  need  to  make  a 
new  translation,  nor  yet  to ✓ make  of  a  bad  one  a 
good  one  ;  but  to  make  a  good  one  better,  or  out 
of  many  good  ones  one  principal  good  one.” 
Still,  their  work,  though  much  assisted  by  the 
labors  of  the  devout  men  and  martyrs  who  had 
wrought  in  the  same  line  before  them,  is  essen¬ 
tially  original.  It  was  done  with  such  prudence, 
diligence,  and  scrupulous  care,  that  even  the  men 
who  would  fain  have  supplanted  it  with  something 
of  their  own,  have  been  forced  to  extol  it,  as  Ba¬ 
laam  did  the  tabernacles  of  'Jacob.  “  Let  us  not 
too  hastily  conclude,”  says  Mr.  Whittaker,  “that 
the  Translators  have  fallen  on  evil  days  and  evil 
tongues,  because  it  occasionally  happens  an  indi¬ 
vidual,  as  inferior  to  them  in  erudition  as  in  tal¬ 
ents  and  integrity,  is  found  questioning  their 
motives,  or  denying  their  qualifications  for  the 
task  which  they  so  well  performed. — It  may  be 
compared  with  any  translation  in  the  world,  with¬ 
out  fear  of  inferiority  ;  it  has  not  shrunk  under 
the  most  rigorous  examination  ;  it  challenges  in¬ 
vestigation  ;  and,  in  spite  of  numerous  attempts 
to  supersede  it,  has  hitherto  remained  unrivalled 
in  the  affections  of  the  country.”*  Who  would 


*  Historical  and  Critical  Enquiry.  P.  92. 


CONCLUSION. 


247 


be  so  tasteless  and  senseless  as  to  insist  on  infus¬ 
ing  new  wine  into  the  old  bottle  ?  Let  us  rather, 
to  use  the  strong  language  of  its  able  vindicator, 
Mr.  Todd,  “take  up  the  Book,  which  from  our 
infancy  we  have  known  and  loved,  with  increased 
delight ;  and  resolve  not  hastily  to  violate,  in  re¬ 
gard  to  itself,  the  rule  of  Ecclesiasticus, — ‘For¬ 
sake  not  an  old  friend,  for  the  new  is  not  com¬ 
parable  to  him.’” 

The  work,  though  not  absolutely  perfect,  nor 
incapable  of  amendment  in  detached  places,  is 
yet  so  well  done,  that  the  Christian  public  will 
not  endure  to  have  it  tampered  with.  It  would 
be  impossible,  as  has  been  demonstrated  in  the 
foregoing  biographical  sketches,  to  collect  at  this 
day  a  body  of  professors  and  divines,  from  Eng¬ 
land  and  America  together,  which  should  be  equal 
in  numbers  and  in  learning  to  those  assembled  by 
King  James;  and  in  whom  the  churches  would 
feel  enough  of  confidence  to  entrust  them  with  a 
repetition  of  the  work.  The  common  version  has 
become  a  permanent  necessity,  through  its  im¬ 
mense  influence  on  the  language,  literature,  man¬ 
ners,  opinions,  character,  institutions,  history,  re¬ 
ligion,  and  entire  life  and  development  of  the 
Anglo-Saxon  race  in  either  hemisphere. 

Taking  into  account  the  many  marked  events 


248 


CONCLUSION. 


in  divine  Providence  which  led  on  to  this  version, 
and  aided  its  accomplishment,  and  necessitated 
its  diffusion, — and  also  that  to  uncounted  millions, 
and  to  other  millions  yet  to  be  born,  it  is  the  only 
safeguard  from  popery  on  the  one  side,  and  from 
infidelity  on  the  other,  we  are  constrained  to 
claim  for  the  good  men  who  made  it  the  highest 
measure  of  divine  aid  short  of  plenary  inspiration 
itself.  We  make  this  claim  regardless  of  the 
supercilious  airs  of  flippant  Sadducees,  or  the 
pitying  smiles  of  literary  pantheists.  Not  that  the 
Translators  were  inspired  in  the  same  sense  as 
were  the  prophets  and  apostles,  and  other  “holy 
men  of  old,”  who  “were  moved  by  the  Holy 
Ghost”  in  drawing  up  the  original  documents  of 
the  Christian  faith.  Such  inspiration  is  a  thing 
by  itself,  like  any  other  miracle  ;  and  belongs  ex¬ 
clusively  to  those  to  whom  it  was  given  for  that 
high  and  unequalled  end. 

But  we  hold  that  the  Translators  enjoyed  the 
highest  degree  of  that  special  guidance  which  is 
ever  granted  to  God’s  true  servants  in  exigencies 
of  deep  concernment  to  his  kingdom  on  earth. 
Such  special  succors  and  spiritual  assistances  are 
always  vouchsafed,  where  there  is  a  like  union  of 
piety,  of  prayers,  and  of  pains,  to  effect  an  ob¬ 
ject  of  such  incalculable  importance  to  the  Church 


CONCLUSION. 


249 


of  the  living  God.  The  necessity  of  a  supernat¬ 
ural  revelation  to  man  of  the  divine  will,  has 
often  been  argued  in  favor  of  the  extreme  proba¬ 
bility  that  such  a  revelation  has  been  made.  A 
like  necessity,  and  one  nearly  as  pressing,  might 
be  argued  in  favor  of  the  belief,  that  this  most 
important  of  all  the  versions  of  God’s  revealed 
will  must  have  been  made  under  his  peculiar 
guidance,  and  his  provident  eye.  And  the  man¬ 
ner  in  which  that  version  has  met  the  wants  of 
the  most  free  and  intelligent  nations  in  the  old 
world  and  the  new,  may  well  confirm  us  in  the 
persuasion,  that  the  same  illuminating  Spirit  which 
indited  the  original  Scriptures,  was  imparted  in 
rich  grace  to  aid  and  guard  the  preparation  of 
the  English  version. 

The  readers  of  this  admirable  version  shall  do 
well,  if  they  avail  themselves  of  every  help  to¬ 
ward  a  right  understanding  of  it  according  to  the 
intent  of  its  authors.  But  such  as  can  obtain  no 
other  help  than  the  Book  itself  affords,  by  prayer¬ 
ful  study  and  comparison  of  scripture  with  scrip¬ 
ture,  may  rely  on  it  as  a  safe  interpreter  of  God’s 
will,  and  will  never  incur  his  displeasure  by  obey¬ 
ing  it  too  strictly.  Whosoever  attempts  to  shake 
the  confidence  of  the  common  people  in  the  com¬ 
mon  version,  puts  their  faith  in  imminent  peril  of 


250 


CONCLUSION. 


shipwreck.  He  is  slipping  the  chain-cable  of  the 
sheet-anchor,  and  casting  their  souls  adrift  among 
the  breakers.  Against  all  such  attempts  let  them 
be  fully  warned,  who  can  only  hear  the  “lively 
oracles”  of  God  address  them  “in  their  own 
tongue  wherein  they  were  born.”  Let  them 
never  fear  but  that  the  All-merciful  who  has 
spoken  to  the  human  race  at  large,  to  teach  them 
his  love,  his  will,  and  his  salvation,  has  so  cared 
for  the  souls  of  the  fifty  civilized  millions  who 
now  use  the  English  speech,  as  to  repeat  to  them 
his  teachings  in  a  form  most  sure  and  sufficient 
as  to  the  whole  round  of  saving  faith  and  holy 
living.  The  best  fruits  of  Christianity  have 
sprung  from  the  seeds  our  translation  has  scat¬ 
tered. 


date  due 


HIGHSMITH  #45230 


BS186.M12 

The  translators  revived  :  a  biographical 

Princeton  Theological  Seminary-Speer  Library 


1  1012  00059  4046 


mmm 


>2 

a- 

'i 

a 

■  c  f '  4 

1 

Hi 

m 

iftr 

'■r 

■a-JliL, 

U  V \f  54 

v. 

Hr 

;  v 

.  ! 

